A 


BX  5199   .L28  H87  1895 
Hutton,  William  Holden,  186( 

-1930. 
William  Laud 


•igitized  by 

the  Internet 

Archive 

in  2015 

https://archive.org/details/williamlaudOOhutt_0 


Seabexz  of  ^teHgton 

Edited  by  H.  C.  Leeching,  M.A. 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


ARCHBISHOP  LAUD 


From  the  Picture  by  Vandyke 
I'ormerly  in  the  possession  of  Sir  Robert  Wnlpole,  now  in  the 
Hermitage  Gallery,  St.  Petersburg. 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


BY 

WILLIAM  HOLDEN  HUTTON,  B.D. 

FELLOW,  TUTOR,  PRECENTOR,  AND  LIBRARIAN  OF  S.  JOHN  BAPTIST  COLLEGE,  OXFORD, 
AND  EXAMINER  IN  THE  HONOUR  SCHOOL  OF  MODERN  HISTORY 


WITH  A  PORTRAIT 


BOSTON  AND  NEW  YORK 
HOUGHTON,  MIFFLIN  AND  COMPANY 

®b/  gifrtrsibt  |}rtss,  Cambridge 
1895 


CONTENTS 


PHAP.  PAOE 

I.  FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY             ...  ...  1 

II.  PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS       ...           ...  ...  36 

III.  LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH              ...           ...  ...  58 

IV.  LAUD  AND  THE  STATE    ...          ...          ...  ...  123 

V.  THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  ...  139 

VI.  FOREIGN  REFORMED  BODIES  :  IRELAND  AND  SCOT- 
LAND        ...       ...       ...       ...  ...  161 

VII.  TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH   ...           ...  ...  187 

VIII.  MEMORIALS  AND  CHARACTER       ...           ...  ...  229 


PREFACE 


The  uncritical  impetuosity  which  a  generation  ago 
overwhelmed  with  contumely,  sarcasm,  and  unhistorical 
rhetoric  the  name  of  William  Laud  has,  it  is  to  be 
hoped,  now  spent  itself.  There  still  lingers  among 
those  whose  historical  knowledge  is  based  upon  the 
obiter  dicta  of  the  partisans  of  fifty  years  ago  a  curious 
survival  of  prejudice  which  is  due  to  ignorance  as  much 
as  to  sectarian  bigotry;  but  the  calm  and  judicial 
investigation  of  writers  more  informed  and  less  biassed 
is  teaching  us  to  read  the  history  of  the  seventeenth 
century  in  a  spirit  very  different  from  that  of  some  of 
our  predecessors.  Those  who  value  the  teaching  of  the 
past  owe  a  deep  debt  to  the  luminous  and  judicial  work 
of  Leopold  von  Ranke.  Beside  that  great  and  honoured 
name  students  of  the  Stewart  age  will  gratefully  place 
that  of  Samuel  Rawson  Gardiner.  It  is  impossible  for 
any  one  who  works  at  this  very  difficult  and  complicated 
period  adequately  to  acknowledge  the  enormous  obliga- 
tion under  which  he  stands  to  Mr.  Gardiner's  knowledge 
and  patience  and  fairness.  It  is  not  the  least  of  his 
services  to  the  cause  of  truth  that  he  has  done  more 
than  any  other  living  writer  to  enable  men  to  critically 
examine  and  justly  estimate  the  career  of  Laud. 


viii 


PREFACE 


Attention  has  lately  been  directed,  with  unusual  in- 
terest, to  the  life  of  the  great  English  churchman  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  '  A  Romish  Recusant,'  attracted 
to  his  subject  by  its  theological  as  well  as  historical 
associations,  has  published  a  long  and  interesting 
biography,  which  has  not  unnaturally  something  of 
a  controversial  tone.  It  is  difficult  to  exclude  con- 
troversy when  writing  the  life  of  the  prominent  champion 
of  a  religious  body  to  which  the  author  does  not  belong  : 
and  there  are  obvious  advantages  to  the  justice  of  an 
historical  estimate  when  the  writer  is  able  to  enter  fully 
into  the  principles  which  guided  the  action  of  his  hero. 
The  Rev.  C.  H.  Simpkinson  has  also  published  a 
valuable  sketch  of  Laud's  Life  and  Times. 

I  had  already  undertaken  to  write  a  life  of  Laud 
before  the  two  recent  works  which  I  have  mentioned 
had  been  announced.  I  have  had  the  advantage  of 
consulting  the  work  of  the  '  Romish  Recusant '  while 
writing  some  part  of  my  own  book ;  but  before  Mr. 
Simpkinson's  volume  was  published  a  great  part  of 
my  manuscript  was  in  print,  so  that  I  have  not  been 
materially  indebted  to  it. 

Other  modern  biographies  or  essays  I  have  en- 
deavoured as  far  as  possible  to  avoid.  I  have  not 
looked  for  some  time  at  Mr.  A.  C.  Benson's  sketch  or 
Dr.  Mozley's  essay.  I  have  tried  to  write  anew  the 
story  of  a  life  which  I  think  will  still  bear  telling 
again. 

The  contemporary  authorities  are  very  numerous. 
Chief  among  them  are  Laud's  own  Works,  very  com- 
pletely collected  in  the  Library  of  Anglo-Catholic 
Theology  in  seven  volumes,  1847 — 1860.  Heylin  in  his 
Cyprianus  Anglicus   became   the   Archbishop's  first 


PREFACE 


ix 


biographer.  Prynne,  in  his  Breviatc,  Hidden  Works  of 
Darkness,  and  Cctnterhuric's  Doome,  takes  the  part  of 
advocatus  diaboli,  but  gives  much  valuable  information. 
The  State  Papers,  Domestic,  contain,  as  might  be  expected, 
an  enormous  amount  of  matter  directly  or  indirectly 
illustrating  Laud's  career.  These  are  the  primary 
sources  of  our  information.  Besides  these  there  are  the 
contemporary  historians,  private  letters,  and  a  large 
mass  of  pamphlet  literature.  Of  all  these,  as  well  as  of 
special  authorities  for  particular  epochs  and  of  local 
records  and  memorials,  I  have  endeavoured  to  make 
use.  For  many  of  the  pamphlets,  as  loans  or  gifts, 
I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  C.  H.  Firth,  whose  generosity  is 
as  great  as  his  knowledge.  Almost  all  the  material  is 
printed,  in  some  form  or  other :  but  happily  there  is 
still  the  interest  of  handling,  at  Lambeth,  in  the  Record 
Office,  and  in  Oxford,  the  very  sheets  on  which  the 
firm  neat  handwriting  of  the  Archbishop  may  be  so 
clearly  read.    These  records  are  generally  accessible. 

For  the  history  of  the  trial  I  have  been  able,  through 
the  kindness  of  the  Provost  and  Fellows  of  Worcester 
College,  to  whom,  and  especially  to  the  Librarian,  Mr. 
Pottinger,  I  am  greatly  indebted,  to  gain  additional 
information  from  a  volume  of  the  Clarke  papers 
(Worcester  College  MS.  71  N.  12),  which  has  not,  so 
far  as  I  can  discover,  been  till  now  used  by  any  writer 
on  the  period. 

William  Clarke  became  a  student  of  the  Inner 
Temple  within  a  year  of  the  Archbishop's  execution. 
From  the  internal  -  evidence  of  his  MS.  I  should  judge 
that  he  attended  the  trial  constantly,  noting  down  at 
the  time  all  that  he  could  of  the  speeches  and  the 
evidence  (for  the  MS.  contains  blanks  as  if  caused  by 


X 


PREFACE 


the  difficulty  of  keeping  up  with  the  speakers),  and  on 
days  when  he  was  absent  briefly  epitomizing  the  in- 
formation he  received  from  other  sources.  Clarke  does 
not  add  very  materially  to  our  knowledge  of  the  pro- 
ceedings, but  he  gives  occasional  details  which  are  of 
interest,  and  he  affords  an  independent  evidence  of  the 
truth  of  the  account  which  Laud  himself  composed. 
Other  volumes  of  the  Clarke  MSS.  are  being  edited  by 
Mr.  C.  H.  Firth.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  this  volume 
also  may  be  made  generally  known. 

It  will  be  obvious  to  any  one  who  reads  this  book 
that  I  have  never  been  outside  the  guidance  of  Mr. 
Gardiner's  History  of  England  and  his  History  of  the 
Great  Civil  War.  Where  I  have  had  the  temerity  to 
disagree  with  some  of  his  conclusions,  it  has  only  been 
after  a  strenuous  effort  to  view  the  particular  points 
from  the  same  standpoint  as  that  of  the  subject  of  my 
memoir.  The  facts  which  Mr.  Gardiner  has  placed  so 
fully  and  so  judicially  before  his  readers  are  sometimes, 
I  think,  capable  of  an  interpretation  different  to  that 
which  he  has  given  them.  My  debt  to  Mr.  Gardiner 
is  one  which  I  share  with  all  students  of  English 
history.  All  who  desire  to  obtain  a  just  estimate  of 
the  Church  history  of  the  period  should  also  be 
acquainted  with  Archdeacon  Perry's  History  of  the 
Church  of  England,  with  Dr.  Bright's  Essay  on  Laud, 
and  with  Mr.  Wakeman's  admirable  and  sympathetic 
book,  The  Church  and  the  Puritans.  My  personal 
thanks  are  due  no  less  to  those  who  have  aided  my 
own  work — to  the  Dean  of  Gloucester,  to  Dr.  A.  J. 
Mason,  vicar  of  the  church  in  which  Laud's  body  was 
laid  till  the  Restoration,  to  Mr.  Kershaw,  Librarian 
of  Lambeth,  and  especially  to  the  Lord  Bishop  of 


PREFACE 


Til 


S.  David's,  whose  kindness  I  cannot  adequately 
acknowledge. 

I  am  under  a  peculiar  obligation  to  the  able  and 
learned  writer  who  has  assumed  the  name  of  '  A 
Romish  Recusant.'  Knowing  nothing  of  me,  he  offered, 
in  the  truest  spirit  of  the  courtesy  of  Letters,  to  assist 
me  in  every  way.  He  generously  gave  me  the  rare 
pamphlet,  The  Recantation  of  the  Prelate  of  Canterbury, 
lent  me  Latcd's  Labyrinth,  and  never  wearied  of 
answering  questions  or  discussing  points  upon  which 
we  "agree  to  differ." 

In  my  own  college  I  have  the  great  privilege  of 
being  guardian  of  the  chiefest  of  the  Laudian  relics, 
and  there  is  much  matter  of  interest  in  our  possession 
of  which  I  have  been  able  to  avail  myself  to  the  full. 

My  book  has  been  written  in  the  midst  of  great 
pressure  of  other  work  and  continual  interruptions,  and 
I  am  painfully  aware  of  its  defects :  but,  such  as  it  is, 
I  offer  it  as  an  attempt  justly  and  historically  to 
estimate  the  character  of  the  great  man  to  whose  pure, 
conscientious,  and  steadfast  soul  the  Church  of  England 
owes  so  much. 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


CHAPTER  L 

FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY. 

The  seventeenth  century  saw  a  long  crisis  in  the 
history  of  the  English  State  and  of  the  English  Church. 
The  heroic  age  of  Elizabeth  had  left  behind  it  grave 
problems,  but  the  wise  men  and  the  heroes  who  might 
have  solved  them  with  the  pen  or  the  sword  were  no 
more.  The  stress  and  terror  which  had  made  men 
gladly  suffer  the  Tudor  despotism  passed  away  as 
England  rose  from  the  political  reconstruction  of 
Europe  a  compact  and  independent  power ;  and  with 
them  passed  the  enthusiasm  of  loyalty  and  the  willing 
sacrifice  of  individual  opinion. 

The  task  that  lay  before  the  first  two  Stewarts  was 
as  difficult  as  that  which  Elizabetli  had  so  triumphantly 
achieved,  and  it  was  a  task  toward  which  her  example 
afforded  but  little  assistance.  Problems  not  wholly 
new,  but  with  new  features,  were  pressing  for  solution. 
Should  England  become  a  despotic  monarchy,  like 
the  monarchy  in  which  the  strength  of  France  was  being 
concentrated  ?  The  question  was  answered  by  great 
political  conflicts,  great  political  theories,  and  a  great 

B 


2 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


civil  war.  In  religion  the  question  was  no  less  pressing. 
Should  the  English  Church  be  severed  by  its  own  act 
from  the  historic  continuity  which  State  law  and  eccle- 
siastical formularies  had  at  the  period  of  the  Reformation 
itself  so  carefully  preserved  ?  Since  the  bull  of  1570, 
it  seemed  impossible  to  heal  the  definite  breach  with 
Rome :  a  few  years  later  the  division  between  the  two 
parties  in  the  English  Church  became  as  irreconcilable. 
The  successors  of  those  who  had  guided  the  Church 
through  her  period  of  change  were  satisfied  with  what 
had  been  done,  and  content  to  abide  in  the  old  paths. 
But  stronger  and  stronger  grew  the  opposition  of  those 
whose  ideal  was  freedom  from  all  that  was  implied  by 
the  continuity  of  the  Church. 

So  long  as  Elizabeth  lived  the  respect  and  submission 
which  had  become  traditional  made  men  acquiesce  in 
decisions  of  the  State  which  a  later  generation  would 
consider  arbitrary  and  intolerable.  The  Englishmen 
of  the  sixteenth  century  had  not  been  unwilling  to 
have  their  religious  differences  settled  for  them :  those 
of  the  seventeenth  were  determined  to  decide  them  for 
themselves. 

Should  the  reforming  movement  proceed  further  ? 
Should  England  consciously  sever  her  ties  with  her 
religious  past  and  the  past  of  historic  Christendom  ? 
It  was  this  to  which  the  seventeenth  century  was  to 
reply.  It  fell  to  one  man  to  embody  the  answer  in  a 
life  of  profound  influence  and  eventfulness. 

Born  at  the  crisis  of  the  breach  with  Rome,  with  his 
young  enthusiasm  fired  by  the  triumph  over  the 
Armada,  brought  up  both  in  the  new  learning  of  the 
late  English  Renaissance  and  in  the  old  humanities 
which  the  Church  and  the  grammar  schools  had  still 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


3 


preserved,  the  greatest  archbishop  who  has  sat  in  the 
chair  of  Augustine  since  the  Reformation  lived  to  lay 
his  head  upon  the  block  amid  the  apparent  failure  of 
all  his  aims,  when  yet  he  had  relaid  firm  and  deep  the 
old  foundations,  which  had  seemed  at  his  birth  to  be  so 
grievously  endangered. 

William  Laud  was  born  at  Reading  on  October  7, 
1573. 

"  The  greatest  rivers  many  times  have  the  smallest 
fountains,  such  as  can  hardly  be  found  out,  and  being 
found  out,  as  hardly  quit  the  cost  of  the  discovery  ;  and 
yet  by  long  running  and  holding  on  a  constant  and  con- 
tinual course,  they  become  large,  navigable,  and  of  great 
benefit  unto  the  publick.  Whereas  some  families  may 
be  compared  to  the  Pyramidcs  of  JEgypt,  which  being 
built  on  great  foundations,  grow  narrower  and  narrower 
by  degrees,  until  at  last  they  end  in  a  small  conus,  in  a 
point,  in  nothing." 

Such  is  Heylin's  retort  to  those  who,  when  his  hero 
had  become  famous,  delighted  to  taunt  him  with  the 
meanness  of  his  birth, — Prynne,  Lord  Brooke,  and  the 
base  libellers  who  cut  to  the  quick  the  man  sensitive 
of  his  father's  honour.  We  should  say  now  that  Laud 
was  one  of  the  middle  class,  "  a  man,"  as  he  said  himself, 
"  of  ordinary  but  very  honest  birth." 

His  father  was  a  clothier  in  a  large  way  of  business. 
His  mother  had  been  twice  married,  and  William  Laud 
was  her  tenth  child  :  her  brother,  Sir  William  Webb, 
some  years  after  became  Lord  Mayor  of  London.  Their 
house  has  long  disappeared,  and  its  site  is  covered  by  a 
block  of  buildings  in  Broad  Street  called  Laud's  Place. 

William  Laud  was  his  father's  only  child,  and  it  is 
clear  that  the  utmost  was  done  for  him  when  he  was  a 


4 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


boy  to  develop  the  masterful  intellect  that  early  made 
itself  apparent.  The  father  prospered,  and  when  he 
died  left  a  comfortable  estate  to  his  son.  The  boy  was 
well  taught  at  Reading  School  by  a  master  severe  even 
for  the  fashion  of  those  times.  Archbishop  Neile,  his 
early  patron  and  later  supporter,  used  to  say  of  himself 
that  the  beatings  he  had  at  Westminster  made  him  a 
poor  scholar  all  his  life.  It  was  not  so  with  Laud.  He 
profited  so  well  and  came  on  so  fast,  that  when  he  was 
sixteen  years  of  age  (which,  says  Heylin,  was  very 
early  for  those  times)  he  was  sent  to  Oxford.  He  matricu- 
lated on  October  17,  1589,  as  a  Commoner  of  S.  John's 
College. 

It  appears  at  first  that  he  was  supported  by  the 
liberality  of  a  friend  or  kinswoman ;  but  on  S.  John's 
Day,  1590,  he  was  chosen  scholar  of  his  college,  and  he 
obtained  his  Fellowship  three  years  later.  Of  his  life  as 
an  undergraduate  little  is  known.  It  appears  that  his 
chamber-fellow  (for  it  was  not  until  a  century  later  that 
the  scholars  obtained  separate  rooms)  was  one  Jones,  a 
Merchant  Taylors'  scholar ;  but  of  their  intimacy  Laud 
says  nothing.1 

His  father  died  in  1594,  and  in  the  same  year  he  took 
his  Bachelor's  degree.  The  weak  health  from  which  he 
suffered  all  through  his  later  life  manifested  itself 
strongly  during  the  years  1596  and  1597.  In  the  next 
year  he  proceeded  to  his  Master's  degree,  and  began  to 
take  part  in  the  educational  work  of  the  college. 

From  a  small  provincial  town,  not  untouched  by  the 
beginnings  of  Puritanism,  Laud  had  come  to  a  great 

1  See  Works,  iv.  317,  344.  This  Jones  afterwards  became  a 
Benedictine  and  Professor  at  Douay,  and  was  known  as  Fr. 
Leander  a  S.  Martino. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


5 


University  where  Calvinism  was  dominant  but  not 
uncontested.  His  own  college  was  one  of  the  smallest  and 
least  important.  It  was  a  new  foundation,  endowed  but 
thirty-four  years  before  by  a  London  merchant,  Sir  Thomas 
White,  and  settled  in  the  buildings  of  an  old  Cistercian 
house.  The  hall  and  chapel  were  those  of  the  monastery ; 
the  fine  old  cellars  belonged  too  to  the  good  old  days ; 
and  there  still  stood  the  statue  of  the  holy  Bernard  over 
the  great  gateway.  Sharp-witted  young  men  when  they 
find  themselves  in  a  place  of  much  freedom  and  little 
responsibility  are  not  generally  eager  to  adopt  the 
opinions  of  their  elders.  If  there  is  a  tutor  who  takes  a 
different  line  from  the  others,  his  enthusiasm  will  win 
many  converts.  It  was  so  with  Laud.  The  college  itself 
had  never  been  violently  Protestant.  Edmund  Campian, 
the  Jesuit,  had  been  trained  there,  and  when  Tobie 
Matthew,  who  was  President,  and  rose  to  be  Archbishop 
of  York,  wrote  against  his  doctrines,  he  appealed  to 
Catholic  tradition  and  Holy  Scripture  rather  than  its 
modern  interpreters.  Many  of  the  Fellows  had  suffered 
for  their  opinions.  Again  and  again  occurs  the  entry 
in  the  college  annals,  "Alterata  religione  aut  evasit 
aut  deprivatus  est."  Yet  the  example  of  the  founder 
had  permanent  effect.  He  had  obtained  the  charter 
of  incorporation  and  drawn  up  his  statutes  under  Queen 
Mary ;  but  he  followed  the  English  Church  in  its 
repudiation  of  the  ,Papal  Supremacy.  Probably  the 
difference  did  not  seem  great  to  the  devout  London 
merchant.  If  the  Pope  could  entertain  the  thought  of 
accepting  the  English  Prayer-Book,  it  must  be  enough 
for  a  plain  man.  And  so  the  college  drew  to  itself  men 
who  thought  with  him. 

Prominent  among  these  was  John  Buckeridge,  and  to 


6 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


him  Laud  became  pupil.  The  learning  and  goodness 
of  the  tutor  had  their  effect,  and  the  lad  grew  up  to 
found  his  study  "  upon  the  noble  foundations  of  the 
fathers,  councils,  and  the  ecclesiastical  historians,"  and 
to  stand  boldly  opposed  to  the  dominant  Calvinism  of 
the  University.  From  Buckeridge  and  his  pupil  in 
S.  John's  came  the  much-needed  re-assertion  of  the 
principles  upon  which  the  English  Reformation  had 
been  carried  through. 

As  a  graduate,  Laud  soon  began  to  come  to  the  front 
in  the  University.  He  was  ordained  deacon  January 
4,  1600,  and  priest  on  Palm  Sunday,  1601.  He  had 
already  been  "grammar  reader"  of  his  college  :  in  1602 
he  held  a  divinity  lectureship.  In  1603  he  became 
proctor,1  and  during  his  year  of  office  took,  after  the 
custom  of  his  college,  the  degree  of  Bachelor  of 
Divinity.  His  colleague  as  proctor  was  Christopher 
Dale  of  Merton  College,  whose  severity  was  contrasted 
with  Laud's  mildness.2  It  is  clear  that  he  was  no  stern 
recluse,  but  took  a  keen  interest  in  the  amusements 
of  the  University.  When  he  was  proctor,  we  find  the 
porter  of  S.  John's  (one  Frank  Clarke,  a  famous  cha- 
racter for  humour)  sending  him  a  letter  of  mock  apology 
for  breaking  a  head  with  his  black  staff,  written  no 
doubt  by  some  smart  scholar,  which  is  proof  enough 
of  the  friendly  terms  on  which  he  stood  with  the 
college  servants.  Laud,  he  said,  had  condoned  his 
"  delictes  and  crimes,"  and  restored  him  "  out  of  the 
porter's  lodge  of  misery  into  the  tower  of  felicity."  In 

1  It  might  be  taken  as  an  instance  of  his  lenity,  that  the  Liber 
Niger  Procuratorum  contains  no  single  record  of  punishment 
during  his  tenure  of  office :  but  the  book  was  not  kept  very  exactly 
at  that  time. 

2  Wood's  Life  and  Times  (Clark),  vol.  ii.,  p.  234. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


the  Christmas  plays  of  the  college  he  bore  such  part  as 
a  senior  could,  by  "subsidizing"  the  actors.  The  famous 
account  of  the  "  Christmas  Prince,"  1  the  most  complete 
record  of  an  University  "mumming"  that  we  possess, 
shows  him  as  contributing  generously  to  the  funds  out 
of  which  the  properties  were  provided.  He  had  no 
Puritan  horror  of  stage-plays.  The  acting  of  the  S. 
John's  scholars  was  a  prominent  feature  of  his  reception 
of  the  King  in  163G.  "I  was  never  play-hunter,"  he 
said  at  Prynne's  trial,  "  but  I  have  observed  at  Court 
some  Puritans  to  be  at  a  play  because  they  would  not  be 
thought  Puritans ;  and  for  better  testimony  that  they 
have  been  there  have  stood  under  the  candlestick  and 
been  dropped  on  by  the  candles,  and  so  have  carried 
away  a  remembrance  of  the  place.  If  your  lordships, 
after  pains  taken  in  the  managing  of  State  affairs,  grow 
weary,  what  is  fitter  than  to  take  your  recreations  ? 
But  Mr.  Prynne  will  not  allow  you  to  see  a  play — 
they  are,  in  his  opinion,  mala  per  sc.  But  I  say,  take 
away  the  scurf  and  rubbish  which  they  are  incident 
unto,  they  are  things  indifferent." 2 

In  the  year  in  which  he  was  made  proctor,  Laud 
entered  into  a  wider  world  by  his  appointment  as 
chaplain  to  Chazdes  Blount,  Earl  of  Devon.  Famous  as 
a  warrior  and  a  politician,  there  yet  lay  upon  his  patron's 
life  the  dark  stain  of  a  shameful  intrigue.  Penelope 
Devereux,  Lord  Essex's  daughter,  had  been  half  affianced 
to  him,  as  she  had  been  to  Philip  Sidney :  she  was 
forced  into  a  marriage  with  Lord  Rich.  The  marriage 
was  a  wretched  one.    Sidney's  own  exquisite  sonnets 

1  S.  John's  College  MSS.  A  few  copies  were  printed  in  1810. 
Miss  Lee  has  edited  (1893)  the  Christmas  play  of  1602,  Narcissus, 
and  has  appended  the  porter's  letter  quoted  above. 

2  Works,  vi.  236. 


8 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


trace  the  course  of  his  passion  for  Stella ;  but  the 
virtue  which  denied  her  love  to  Astrophel  did  not 
resist  the  assaitlt  of  another  lover.  Lady  Rich  became 
before  many  years  the  avowed  mistress  of  Charles 
Blount,  who  had  succeeded  to  his  brother's  title  of 
Lord  Mountj oy,  and  afterwards  been  created  Earl  of 
Devon  for  his  services  in  Ireland.  She  was  divorced ; 
and  Lord  Devon  endeavoured  to  make  what  repara- 
tion seemed  possible  for  him.  In  1605  Laud  was 
asked  to  marry  the  guilty  couple :  he  consented.  The 
day  on  which  he  solemnized  the  unhallowed  wedding, 
the  Feast  of  S.  Stephen,  was  ever  after  observed  by 
him  in  remorse  and  penitence  as  a  strict  fast.  His 
prayers  show  how  deeply  he  regretted  his  error.  It 
was  the  great  blot  upon  his  life  :  but  it  is  not  difficult  to 
understand  the  strong  inducements  which  had  weighed 
with  him.  Ambition  has  been  assigned  as  a  cause.1 
If  it  was  so,  never  was  ambition  so  ill-served,  for  Lord 
Devon  was  at  once  disgraced  by  the  King,  who  could 
not  tolerate  the  re-marriage  of  divorced  persons,  and 
died  within  a  year,  while  Laud  too  fell  under  the 
King's  displeasure,  and  was  for  a  long  time  shut  out 
from  all  preferment.  It  is  incredible  that  James's  views 
on  divorce  should  not  have  been  known,  and  it  is  certain 
that  Laud  had  stronger  and  more  well-grounded  stimu- 
lants  than  ambition.  Pity  for  the  unhappy  woman,2  round 
whose  life  the  beauty  of  Sidney's  romantic  devotion  still 
lingered — the  knowledge  that  there  had  been  what 
might  serve  as  a  pre-contract  in  foro  conscicntice,  as 
Heylin  says,  though  not  in  foro  judicii — and  the  sup- 

1  "  Serving  my  ambition  and  the  sins  of  others,"  he  says  in  his 
own  prayer  of  penitence. 

2  Mr.  Benson,  Life  of  Lavd,  thinks  the  pathetic  picture  at 
Lambeth  is  her  portrait,  kept  with  a  touching  fidelity  by  Laud. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


0 


port  of  some  divines  of  eminence,1 — these  may  well  have 
moved  him.  He  was  a  young  man,  and  his  bitterest 
critics,  if  they  cannot  forgive  him,  may  well  remember 
that  he  could  never  forgive  himself. 

There  remain  at  Lambeth  and  in  the  Record  Office, 
two  curious  relics  of  the  unhappy  affair.  At  Lambeth 2 
is  preserved  the  "discourse  written  by  ye  Earl  of 
Devonshire  in  defence  of  his  marriage  with  ye  Lady 
Rich,"  in  his  own  hand.  After  being  pi'esented  to  the 
King,  it  seems  to  have  passed  into  the  hands  of  Laud. 
Among  the  State  Papers  of  James  I.  lies  the  "  Censure 
of  the  Earl  of  Devonshire's  tract  touching  marriage  and 
divorce,  by  William  Laud."  3  When  he  wrote  this  Laud 
had  ceased  to  justify  his  action.  "The  authority  of  the 
canon  law — true,"  he  comments,  "to  putting  away  his 
wife  ;  but  neither  silent  nor  unexpressed  to  marry  again." 
He  adds  a  pathetic  note  as  to  the  circumstances  under 
which  he  came  to  write.  Lord  Devon's  tract  was 
"  committed  to  me  to  read  over  twice,"  and  the  answer  is 
page  by  page.  "  These  papers  were  in  my  lord's  hands 
when  he  died." 

Thus  we  may  leave  the  unhappy  business  and  return 
to  Laud's  work  at  the  University.  He  had  already,  by 
his  exercises  for  the  degree  of  B.D.,  when  he  discussed 
the  efficacy  of  baptism,  taken  his  stand  against  the 
ultra-Protestant  teaching  then  current.  Preaching  at 
S.  Mary's  on  October  20,  he  maintained  the  Catholic 
doctrine  and  position  of  the  English  Church.  The 
Vice-Chancellor,  Dr.  Airay,  Provost  of  Queen's,  at 
once  "picked  a  quarrel"  with  him,  and  he  was  "con- 

1  See  Heylin,  Cijpr.  Angl.,  p.  58  ;  and  cf.  Cosin's  Argument  on 
the  Dissolution  of  Marriage. 

2  M.S.  943,  f.  47. 

3  State  Papers,  Domestic,  vol.  xx.,  no.  53. 


10 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


vented."  The  examination  of  a  sermon  by  the  Vice- 
Chancellor,  and  certain  Doctors  of  Divinity  opposed 
to  the  preacher,  is  not  an  unfamiliar  feature  in  the  career 
of  any  great  Oxford  leader  of  religion.  All  who  have 
been  subjected  to  the  ordeal  have  not  fared  so  well 
as  Laud.  It  chanced  that  Sir  William  Paddy,  the 
King's  physician,  and  M.P.  for  Thetford,  himself  a  S. 
John's  man,  heard  the  sermon  in  S.  Mary's,  and  he 
at  once  wrote  to  the  Chancellor,  the  Earl  of  Dorset,  to 
inform  him  of  the  facts,  and  stated  that  moreover 
"  some  two  or  three  very  learned  men  of  the  Court  had 
seen  and  considered  of  his  sermon,  and  had  given  ap- 
probation of  the  same."  The  Chancellor  immediately 
wrote  to  Dr.  Airay,  speaking  of  Sir  William  Paddy  as 
his  "good  friend,  a  man  religious,  learned,  and  one 
whom  I  love  and  trust,"  and  suggesting  a  reference  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  the  Bishop  of 
London.  The  Vice-Chancellor  hastily  retreated  from 
his  opposition,  and  ceased  all  proceedings  against  Laud. 

From  this  date  ecclesiastical  preferments  came  to 
him  in  abundance.  Sir  Thomas  Cave  gave  him  the 
living  of  Stanford  in  Northamptonshire  in  1607 :  to 
this  was  added  North  Kihvorth,  1008  (exchanged  for 
West  Tilbury  in  1G09),  and  Cuckston  in  1610.  On 
June  6,  1608,  he  took  the  degree  of  D.D.,  declaring 
in  his  thesis  the  divine  right  of  episcopacy — not 
without  unfavourable  comment.1 

Meanwhile  his  old  college  tutor  had  not  forgotten 

1  "  My  tenet  was,  and  still  is,  that  episcopatus  is  jure  divino." 
Marginal  notes  on  Prynne's  Breviate,  in  Works,  iii.  262.  Prynne 
says  Dr.  Holland,  the  Regius  Professor,  "publicly  reprehended 
him  in  the  schools, "  but  Laud  says  "  it  is  a  notorious  untruth  that 
Dr.  Holland  said  any  such  thing."  Mr.  Gardiner,  Diet.  Nat. 
Biog.,  Art.  "  Laud,"  has  confused  this  occasion  with  the  B.D. 
Heylin  makes  the  same  mistake.    See  Laud's  W orks,  as  above. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


II 


him,  and  after  the  death  of  Lord  Devon  recommended 
him  to  Dr.  Ncile,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  whose  chaplain 
he  became  on  August  5,  1608.  Neile,  says  Heylin 
very  happily,  was  "  a  man  who  very  well  understood 
the  constitution  of  the  Church  of  England,  though 
otherwise  not  so  eminent  in  all  parts  of  learning  as 
some  other  bishops  of  his  time ;  but  what  he  wanted 
in  himself  he  made  good  in  the  choice  of  his  servants, 
having  more  able  men  about  him  from  time  to  time 
than  any  other  of  that  age ; "  and  he  adds,  "  none  of 
his  chaplains  was  received  so  much  into  his  counsels 
as  Dr.  Laud,  whom  he  found  both  an  active  and  a 
trusty  servant,  as  afterwards  a  most  constant  and  faith- 
ful friend  upon  all  occasions." 1  From  Neile  Laud 
received  several  of  his  preferments,  and  through  him 
the  King  first  took  notice  of  him.  He  preached  at 
Theobald's,  September  17,  1609,  and  on  November  20, 
1610,  he  received  the  grant  in  reversion  of  a  prebend 
in  Westminster  Abbey.2  In  the  same  year  he  resigned 
his  Fellowship,  in  order  to  devote  himself  to  his  work  as 
chaplain  and  parish  priest.  It  might  seem  as  if  the 
dominant  Calvinism  had  banished  him  from  the  Uni- 
versity.   But  he  was  not  long  to  be  absent. 

"His  good  friend  and  tutor,  Dr.  Buckeridge,"  says 
Heylin,  "  being  nominated  successor  unto  Neile  in  the 
see  of  Rochester,3  laid  a  good  ground  for  his  succession 
in  the  Presidentship  of  S.  John's  College,  thereby  to 
render  him  considerable  in  the  University."  Buckeridge 
had  done  so  much  for  his  college,  that  his  influence  had 
rightly  great  weight  with  the  Fellows  in  their  choice 
of  a  successor.   It  was  rumoured  in  the  University  that 

1  Cyprianus  Anglieus,  pp.  59,  60. 

2  Calendar  of  State  Papers,  Dom.,  1603-10,  p.  644. 

3  When  Neile  was  translated  to  Lichfield. 


12 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Laud  would  be  elected,  and  the  Calvinists  took  alarm. 
George  Abbot,  elected  to  the  see  of  Canterbury  on  the 
death  of  Bancroft,  formerly  Master  of  University  and 
Vice-Ghancellor,  had  known  Laud  in  Oxford  and  dis- 
trusted his  opinions.  By  his  influence,  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor, Elsmere,  who  succeeded  Bancroft  as  Chancellor 
of  the  University,  approached  the  King  with  charges 
of  popery  and  prophecies  of  disaster  to  Oxford  if  Laud 
were  given  power.  Whatever  may  have  been  James's 
sympathies  in  the  matter — and  it  is  known  that  he 
did  not  like  Laud — he  was  too  shrewd  or  too  just  to 
interfere  prematurely  in  a  matter  of  merely  academic 
interest. 

The  election  proceeded.  On  May  10,  1G11,  the 
Fellows  met  in  the  chapel.  When  the  nomination 
papers  had  been  laid  on  the  altar,1  and  before  the 
Vice-President  had  announced  the  result,  one  of  the 
Fellows,  who  supported  'another  candidate  for  the  head- 
sbij),2  snatched  the  paper  and  tore  it  in  pieces.  The 
Visitor,  Bishop  Bilson  of  Winchester,  referred  the 
matter  to  the  King.3  James  "  sat  in  person  for  three 
hours  to  hear  "  the  cause.  The  day,  as  Laud — to  whom 
coincidences  were  somewhat  of  omens — notes,  was  The 
Beheading  of  S.  John  Baptist  in  the  Church  Calendar; 
and  the  King,  after  his  patient  hearing,  confirmed 
Laud  as  President,  "  considering  that  the  election 
was  no  further  corrupt  and  partial  than  all  elections 
are  liable  to  be,"  and  ordered  that  "  clearer  inter- 
pretation of  the  statutes  be  made  for  the  future." 4 

1  This  was  till  recently  the  custom  at  all  college  elections. 

2  Dr.  E.  Rawlinson,  formerly  Fellow,  afterwards  Principal  of 
S.  Edmund  Hall. 

3  Cal.  of  State  Papers,  June  14,  Aug.  5,  1C11. 

4  Ibid.,  Sept.  23,  1611. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY  13 


He  might  take  a  lawful  pride  in  his  success,  for  it 
was  won  by  no  personal  intrigue.  Years  later  he  said, 
"  When  I  was  chosen  there  was  a  bitter  faction  both 
raised  and  countenanced  against  me  (I  will  forbear  to 
relate  how  and  by  whom).  But  this  is  certain,  I  made 
no  party  there ;  for  four  being  in  nomination  for  that 
headship,  I  lay  then  so  sick  at  London,  that  I  was 
neither  able  to  go  down  nor  so  much  as  write  to  my 
friends  about  it." 1 

He  showed  a  remarkable  absence  of  all  personal 
feeling,  indeed,  in  all  that  concerned  his  election. 
His  chief  opponent  had  been  the  young  Fellow  named 
Richard  Baylie,  who  had  torn  up  the  voting  papers. 
Laud  showed  him  special  favour,  procured  his  election 
as  proctor  in  1615,  married  him  to  his  brother's  daughter, 
when  he  became  bishop  made  him  chancellor  of  S. 
David's  Cathedral  and  his  own  chaplain,  and  eventually 
raised  him  to  be  President  of  S.  John's  and  Vice- 
Chancellor. 

During  the  years  he  now  spent  in  Oxford,  Laud  de- 
voted himself  to  the  domestic  governance  of  his  own 
society,  and  to  the  task  of  theological  reformation  in 
the  University. 

At  first  he  had  great  difficulty  in  college.  His 
opponents  "  continued  very  eager  and  bitter."  But 
"  the  audit  of  the  college  for  the  year's  accounts,  and 
choice  of  new  officers,  followed  in  November;  there  so 
God  blessed  me,"  he  says  in  later  years,  "  with  patience 
and  moderation  in  the  choice  of  all  offices,  that  I  made 
all  quiet  in  the  college.  And  for  all  the  narrowness  of 
my  comprehensions  (it  is  a  retort  to  those  who  then,  as 
men  do  now,  called  him  'narrow'),  I  governed  that 

1  Works,  v.  88. 


14 


AVILLIAM  LAUD 


college  in  peace,  without  so  much  as  the  show  of  a 
faction,  all  my  time,  which  was  near  upon  eleven  years." 

The  college  hooks  amply  support  this  statement,  and 
the  college  annalists  speak  enthusiastically  of  his 
moderation  and  generosity.  The  period  of  Laud's 
connection  with  S.  John's  marks  the  rise  of  the 
college  from  a  poor  and  struggling  foundation,  owing 
its  presidents  to  the  favour  of  Christ  Church  and  its 
continued  existence  to  almost  chance  benefactions,  to  a 
position  of  prominence,  if  not  preponderance,  in  the 
University.  The  energy  of  Laud  was  largely  responsible 
for  this  change  ;  but  Buckeridge,  J uxon,  Paddy,  Baylie, 
each  had  share,  in  different  ways,  as  churchman,  man 
of  business,  courtier,  and  industrious  worker  in  college 
business,  in  raising  the  status  of  Sir  Thomas  White's 
foundation. 

Laud's  return  to  the  University  plunged  him  at 
once  into  its  theological  squabbles.  Robert  Abbot, 
Master  of  Balliol,  elder  brother  of  the  Archbishop, 
became  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity  in  1612.  "  Depend- 
ing altogether  on  the  will  of  his  brother,  he  thought 
he  could  not  gratify  and  oblige  him  more  than  by 
pursuing  the  old  quarrels  against  Laud."  He  was  not 
long  without  occasion.  A  sermon  of  Laud's,  Catholic 
and  anti-Puritan,  roused  his  ire,  and  he  retorted, 
at  the  next  opportunity,  from  the  University  pulpit — 
"Might  not  Christ  say,  What  art  thou,  Romish  or 
English,  Papist  or  Protestant  ?  Or  what  art  thou  ? — a 
mongrel  compound  of  both  :  a  Protestant  by  ordination, 
a  Papist  in  point  of  free  will,  inherent  righteousness, 
and  the  like.  A  Protestant  in  receiving  the  Sacrament ; 
a  Papist  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament.  What,  do 
you  think  there  be  two  Heavens  ?  If  there  be,  get  you  to 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


15 


the  other  and  place  yourselves  there,  for  into  this  where 
I  am  ye  shall  not  coine."  1  This  stuff  had  been  preached 
on  a  Saint's  Day,  and  was  repeated  on  the  Sunday 
following,  and  Laud  boldly  sat  through  it.  Men  pointed 
their  fingers  at  him  in  the  church,  and  it  was  counted 
heresy  to  speak  to  him,  and  suspicion  of  heresy  to  greet 
him  in  the  street.  But  the  opposition  was  too  coarse 
to  be  strong,  and  Laud  lived  it  down.  We  have  no 
details,  but  we  know  that  in  ten  years  the  current  of 
University  partisanship  ran  all  in  his  favour.  He  con- 
sulted Neile  as  to  how  to  treat  the  censure,  and 
apparently  received  conciliatory  advice,  for  no  more 
was  said,  and  Abbot  became  Bishop  of  Salisbury  in 
1615.  Prideaux,  his  successor  in  the  Professorship, 
was  also  a  Puritan,  but  Laud  was  more  than  a  match 
for  him. 

Soon  after  his  election  to  S.  John's  the  King  made 
Laud  his  chaplain.  In  1614  he  received  a  prebend  2 
in  Lincoln  Cathedral,  and  next  year  became  Archdeacon 
of  Huntingdon. 

The  duties  of  his  headship  and  his  archdeaconry 
were  not  sufficient  to  occupy  all  the  time  of  so  ener- 
getic a  man  as  Laud.  The  King,  whatever  he  may 
have  thought  of  his  character,  did  not  underrate  his 
ability,  and  at  length  in  1616  gave  him  the  deanery  of 
Gloucester.  He  had  seemingly  a  special  object,3  and 
he  desired  the  new  Dean  at  once  to  take  in  hand 
the  reformation  of  the  cathedral.  "  His  Majesty,"  says 
Laud,  writing  to  the   Bishop  of  Gloucester,  "was 

1  Quoted  by  Heylin,  Oyprianus  Awjlicus,  p.  67. 

2  Buckden. 

3  Mr.  Gardiner,  History  of  England,  iii.  245,  thinks  be  bad 
begun  to  regret  bis  appointment  of  a  Calvinist,  Miles  Smith,  to 
the  bishopric. 


16  _ 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


graciously  pleased  to  tell  me  he  was  informed  that 
there  was  scarce  ever  a  church  in  England  so  ill- 
governed  and  so  much  out  of  order;  and  withal  re- 
quired me  in  general  to  reform  and  set  in  order  what 
I  found  there  amiss."  1  The  new  Dean  at  once  began 
his  reforms.  He  was  installed  on  December  20,  1616. 
At  the  next  meetings  of  the  chapter,  on  January  15 
and  17,  161 7,2  it  was  agreed  that  the  necessary  repairs 
of  the  cathedral  be  immediately  undertaken ;  and 
secondly,  that  the  Holy  Table  be  placed  at  the  east  end 
of  the  choir,  the  place  appointed  for  it  by  Queen 
Elizabeth's  injunctions  and  by  the  unaltered  practice  of 
the  royal  chapels  and  most  of  the  cathedrals.3  In 
making  this  alteration  it  is  clear  that  Laud  did  not 
regard  himself  as  an  innovator.  "  The  city,"  says 
Heylin,  "  was  at  that  time  much  pestered  with  the 
Puritan  faction,  which  was  grown  multitudinous  and 
strong  by  reason  of  the  small  abode  which  the  Dean 
and  prebendaries  made  amongst  them,  the  dull  con- 
nivance of  their  bishop,  and  the  remiss  government 

1  Works,  vl  239,  Feb.  27,  1616-17. 

2  Act  Book  of  Gloucester  Chapter.   See  Laud's  Works,  iv.  233. 

3  Cf.  Archbishop  of  Canterbury's  judgment,  Read  and  others 
v.  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  1890,  p.  22  sqq.  The  question  of  the 
"eastward  position"  is  not  mentioned  by  Laud  as  arising  at 
Gloucester.  The  Archbishop's  judgment  does  not  appear  to 
observe  the  significance  of  the  fact,  that  when  the  position  of  the 
altar  was  fixed  at  the  east  end  the  rubrical  direction  of  "  North 
side "  was  retained.  It  is  not  to  be  presumed  that  Laud  either 
forgot  or  ignored  the  rubric.  It  should  also  be  observed,  that 
Laud's  own  orders  (cf.  Works,  v.  495)  direct  that  the  ends  of  the 
altar  should  stand  "north  and  south."  It  would  appear  there- 
fore that  he  interpreted  the  expression  "north  side"  in  conjunc- 
tion with  "  before  the  table,"  as  implying  a  position  at  the  north 
end  of  the  west  side  of  the  altar.  Cf.  Archbishop's  judgment, 
p.  40.  "It  seems  that  ministers  who  officiated  before  the  table 
still  held  to  the  letter  of  the  rubric  by  standing  towards  the 
north  part." 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY  17 


of  their  metropolitan,  so  that  it  seemed  both  safe  and 
easy  to  some  of  the  rabble  to  make  an  outcry  in  all 
places  that  popery  was  coming  in."  1  The  bishop  de- 
clared that  he  would  not  enter  the  cathedral  again. 
One  of  his  chaplains  wrote  a  letter  which  was  circulated 
as  a  popular  libel  attacking  the  chapter.2  Alderman 
Jones,  before  whom  some  who  were  distributing  the 
pamphlet  were  brought,  advised  the  chapter  to  bring 
the  libellers  before  the  High  Commission.  But  Laud 
after  the  Chapter  meeting  had  retired  quietly  to 
Oxford.  He  was  in  favour  of  no  such  extreme 
measures.  He  merely  wrote  to  the  bishop  referring 
to  the  Chapter  Act  as  based  upon  law  and  custom. 
To  his  patron  Neile  he  wrote  also,  "  I  beseech  your 
lordship  let  me  have  your  lawful  assistance  that  so  long- 
as  I  do  nothing  but  that  which  is  established  and 
practised  in  our  Church,  I  may  not  be  brought  into 
contempt  at  my  first  entrance  upon  that  place  by  any 
turbulent  spirits,  and  so  disenabled  to  do  that  good 
service  which  I  owe  to  the  Church  of  God."  The 
whole  business  did  not  lie  heavy  upon  his  mind :  he 
had  clear  warrant  for  his  action,3  and  in  less  than  a 
month  he  set  out  for  Scotland  with  the  King.4 

It  was  only  at  its  beginning  that  Laud's  tenure  of 
the  deanery  was  stormy.  He  remained  Dean  till  he 
received  the  bishopric  of  S.  David's  in  1621,  and  was 
constantly  present  at  chapter  meetings.5    He  did  the 

1  Cyprianus  Anglicus,  p.  70. 

2  See  Prynne's  Canterbnrie's  Doome,  pp.  75 — 78. 

3  Injunctions  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  Wilkins,  Concilia,  iv.  188. 
And  cf.  the  declaration  of  precedent  given  in  the  canons  of  1640 
(Laud's  Works,  vi.  625),  which  clearly  represent  Laud's  mind. 

4  On  March  14,  1616-17.    See  Diary. 

5  Information  kindly  given  by  the  chapter  clerk  of  Gloucester. 

c 


1ft 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


work  that  he  was  intended  to  do,  bnt  other  claims 
pressed  on  him.  He  has  left  no  distinct  traces  on  the 
most  exquisite  of  English  cathedrals.1  The  restoration 
which  he  took  in  hand  has  been  merged  in  other 
restorations,  and  the  cathedral  suffered  exceptionally 
during  the  civil  wars ;  only  a  little  wood-work  of 
Jacobean  renaissance  remains  to  preserve  his  memory 
at  Gloucester.2 

His  work  at  Oxford  had  received  the  King's  sanction. 
In  1616  James  himself  intervened  in  academic  affairs 
by  sending  instructions  to  the  Vice-Chancellor,  which 
influenced  the  theological  studies  of  the  University  in 
the  direction  of  Laud's  views.  Preachers  were  to 
adhere  to  the  distinctive  teaching  of  the  Church,  and 
students  in  Divinity  were  to  be  "  excited  to  bestow 
their  time  on  the  Fathers  and  Councils,  schoolmen, 
histories  and  controversies" — a  wider  field  than  Puri- 
tanism approved — "making  them  the  grounds  of  their 
studies." 

James  at  last  gave  Laud  a  bishopric.    On  June  3, 

1  He  used  his  knowledge  of  Gloucester  later  during  his  metro- 
political  visitation.  Cf.  Works,  v.  480-1  as  to  the  dean's  and 
mayor's  seats.  Did  he  remember  any  naughty  boys  of  his  own 
time  when  he  ordered  "  that  Thomas  Longe  and  Richard  Longe, 
two  of  your  choristers  who  are  presented  for  incorrigible  boys,  be 
forthwith  removed  from  their  places  and  others  chosen  in  their 
rooms  "  ? 

4  The  present  Dean,  so  famous  for  knowledge  and  love  of  his 
cathedral,  very  kindly  writes  to  me  as  follows — "  I  could  not 
definitely  say  that  there  was  any  '  Laudian '  work  in  the  cathedral. 
The  Renaissance  altar  rails  in  the  Lady  Chapel  are,  I  think,  some  30 
or  40  years  later.  .  .  .  The  door  leading  into  the  Monks'  Parlour 
beneath  my  Library  is  dated  1614 — two  years  before  Laud  be- 
came dean.  Similar  but  rather  better  work  panels  my  drawing- 
room.  Probably  this  was  Laud's  doing.  Some  wood-work  on  the 
organ-loft,  south  side,  is  of  a  similar  character,  and  is  likely  to 
have  been  his  doing." 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


1!) 


1621,  he  spoke  graciously,  says  the  Diary,  "concerning 
my  long  service.  He  was  pleased  to  say  he  had  given 
me  nothing  but  Gloucester,  which  he  well  knew  was  a 
shell  without  a  kernel,"  and  on  June  29  "  he  gave  me 
the  grant  of  the  bishopric  of  S.  David's."  He  was 
consecrated  on  November  18.1 

The  bishopric  of  S.  David's  was  not  a  very  appro- 
priate see  for  an  Englishman  already  much  occupied 
with  affairs  of  State,  and  it  was  some  time  before  the 
conclusion  of  Parliament2  allowed  Laud  to  visit  his 
diocese.  The  King  evidently  wished  to  keep  him  in 
England :  he  gave  him  leave  to  retain  the  headship  of 
S.  John's,  but  Laud  would  on  no  account  violate  the 
college  statutes,  and  resigned  the  Presidentship  shortly 
after  his  consecration.3 

On  October  10,  1621,  he  was  elected  by  the  chapter 
of  S.  David's,  and  on  December  30  he  was  installed, 
Dr.  Robert  Rudd,  Archdeacon  of  S.  David's,  being 
his  proxy.4  On  the  5th  of  the  following  July  Laud 
"  first  entered  into  Wales,"  and  four  days  later  began 
his  first  visitation  at  Brecon.  Thence  he  went  to  S. 
David's,  where  the  register  shows  him  to  have  been 
present  on  July  22.  His  first  meeting  with  his  chapter 
was  characteristic.  "  Whereas,"  runs  the  record,  "  the 
Reverend  Father  in  God,  William  Laud,  Bishop  of  S. 
David's,  hath  taken  offence  that  the  muniments  of  the 
said  church  are  in  such  shameful  confusion  and  so  much 

1  The  consecrators  were  the  Bishops  of  London,  Worcester, 
Chichester,  Ely,  Llandaff,  and  Oxford,  Archbishop  Abbot  being 
then  under  suspension  for  the  accidental  homicide  of  a  keeper. 

2  Heylin,  Cypr.  Anglic,  p.  93. 

3  Diary,  Works,  iii.  136-7. 

4  Register  of  S.  David's  Cath.  Reg.  Men,  D.,  pp.  1—3. 


20 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


neglected,  he  hath,  with  the  consent  of  the  precentor 1 
and  chapter,  ordered  and  decreed  as  follows — viz.  that 
all  and  singular  instruments,  deeds,"  &c,  be  transcribed 
and  kept  in  safe  custody  by  the  chapter  clerk.  This 
very  necessary  order  is  signed  in  the  bold  handwriting 
of  "  Guill.  Meneven."  In  the  same  meeting  the  chapter 
deposed  the  school-master,  as  "  being  insufficient  for  the 
place,"  allowing  him  his  stipend  for  a  time,  "  that  he 
might  in  that  space  provide  otherwise  for  himself." 
Laud  was  accompanied  by  his  nephew,  Richard  Baylie, 
whom  he  nominated  chancellor  of  the  cathedral.  On 
the  same  day  as  the  visitation  of  the  chapter  he  was 
personally  installed.2 

Laud  returned  to  En°land  on  August  15.  He  did 
not  return  to  his  diocese  till  1625.  He  did  not,  how- 
ever, remit  his  care,  but  kept  as  close  a  watch  on  his 
see  as  was  possible  for  a  non-resident  bishop.  In 
inquiry  for  recusants,  as  well  as  in  spiritual  direction, 
the  State  Papers  show  him  to  have  been  active.  When 
he  returned  in  August  1625,  he  found  the  chapel  which 
he  had  built  in  the  house  at  Abergwili  ready  for 
consecration.  The  palace  appears  to  have  needed  con- 
siderable restoration.  Bishop  Ferrar,  who  had  the 
singular  ill-fortune  to  be  imprisoned  by  Edward  VI. 
and  burnt  by  Mary,  excused  himself  for  not  performing 

1  At  S.  David's,  where  the  bishop  had  originally  been  dean, 
the  precentor  up  to  1840  was  head  of  the  chapter.  Since  that 
date  the  precentor  has  assumed,  by  3  &  4  Vict,  c.  113,  the  title  of 
dean.  I  need  hardly  mention,  as  the  great  classic  on  all  that 
concerns  S.  David's,  the  monumental  work  of  the  present  bishop 
and  the  late  Mr.  Freeman. 

2  By  the  kindness  of  the  venerable  Dean  of  S.  David"s,  I  have 
been  allowed  to  inspect  the  chapter  register,  the  valuable  Col- 
lectanea Menevensia  of  Canon  Payne,  and  the  interesting  note- 
books of  Archdeacon  Yardley. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY  21 


the  episcopal  duty  of  hospitality  by  declaring  the 
ruinous  condition  of  the  hall.  The  house  was  repaired 
by  later  bishops,  and  Laud's  chapel  is  on  the  floor  over 
the  present  library.  It  seems  probable  that  the  hall 
Bishop  Ferrar  speaks  of  was  divided  into  two  rooms  on 
the  ground  floor,  while  its  height  would  admit  of  the 
creation  of  an  upper  floor,  on  which  are  the  chapel  and 
the  present  drawing-room.  Laud's  own  buildings  are 
so  few  that  the  chapel  at  Abergwili  deserves  special 
notice.  It  is  in  size  and  arrangement  very  like  the 
chapel  of  a  small  college.  Re-decorated  by  the  present 
bishop  and  his  predecessor,  it  still  shows  clear  indications 
of  its  appearance  when  Laud  finished  it.  Its  unusual 
position  adds  considerably  to  its  interest,  and  its  con- 
tinuous use  for  the  most  sacred  purposes  gives  it  a 
special  claim  to  the  reverence  of  those  who  respect  its 
founder.  It  was  consecrated  on  Sunday,  August  28, 
1625,  which  Laud  notes  in  his  Diary  as  being  the  eve 
of  the  Decollation  of  S.  John  Baptist,  a  day  appro- 
priate from  its  association  with  his  beloved  college,  and 
recalling  to  his  mind  the  King's  hearing  of  the  question  of 
his  election  to  the  Presidentship  fourteen  years  before.1 
The  act  of  consecration  was  charged  against  him  as 
a  crime  at  his  trial,  and  the  charge  was  reinforced  by 
the  discovery  of  the  list  of  furniture  in  Bishop  Andrewes' 
chapel,  which  Prynne  declared  to  be  Laud's.2  He  gave 
valuable  plate  to  the  chapel,  "  rich  furniture  and  costly 
utensils  and  whatsoever  else  was  necessary  or  convenient 
for  the  service  of  God,"  says  Heylin,  and  the  sacred 
vessels  alone,  he  adds,  cost  £155  18s.  4nl.    It  does  not 

1  See  Diary,  Works,  iii.  171-2.  The  instrument  of  consecration 
is  in  Prynne,  Ccmterburie's  Doome,  pp.  120,  121. 

2  See  Ciuderburie's  Doome,  pp.  121-4,  and  Laud's  Works,  iv. 
251. 


22 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


appear,  however,  that  the  chapel  was  completed,  or  if 
it  was  it  suffered  considerably  during  the  civil  wars, 
for  Bishop  Lucy,1  writing  in  1670,  speaks  of  his  own 
work  in  it.  "  The  chapel,"  he  writes,  "  is  not  yet 
finished,  but  I  have  given  orders  for  it,  and  I  have 
acquainted  Dr.  Thomas  that  if  I  finish  it  not  in  my 
life,  I  have  left  £100  in  my  will  for  the  completing  of 
it  with  seats  and  plate,  Avhich  I  know  will  make  it  more 
decent  than  ever  it  was." 

Laud  did  not  stay  long  at  Abergwili,  yet  the  beauty 
of  the  place  and  the  pleasant  old  manor-house  looking 
across  the  broad  river  to  the  wood-covered  hills  must 
have  given  him  days  of  happy  quiet.  We  can  trace 
his  journeys  from  his  Diary,  where  he  tells  of  his 
carriage  breaking  down  between  Aber-marlies  (Aber- 
marlais  probably,  not  many  miles  away,  on  the  hills) 
and  his  house,  and  of  his  ride  into  the  mountains  on  a 
bright  October  day,  when  he  and  his  company  dined 
with  his  registrary  at  his  country  farm  of  "  Pente 
Cragg,"  a  mile  from  the  palace,  whence  a  beautiful 
mountain  view  can  be  seen.  On  November  11  he  left 
Wales.  In  the  following  June  he  was  given  the 
bishopric  of  Bath  and  Wells. 

His  episcopate  cannot  be  said  to  have  left  much 
mark  on  the  Welsh  Church.  He  seems  only  to  have 
held  two  ordinations :  and  on  another  occasion  "  only 
one  person  desired  to  receive  holy  orders  .  .  .  and  he 
found  to  be  unfit,  upon  examination."  The  unhappy 
man  was  "  sent  away  with  an  exhortation."  His  tenure 
of  a  Welsh  see  served  merely  to  increase  his  knowledge 

1  Letter  to  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  dated  Brecon,  October 
10,  1670.  I  have  to  thank  the  Lord  Bishop  of  S.  David's  for 
allowing  me  to  inspect  his  muniments,  among  which  I  found  a 
copy  of  this  letter. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


23 


of  the  needs  of  the  outlying  districts  and  his  deter- 
mination to  supply  them.  But  his  short  stay  at  beautiful 
Abergwili  was  not  forgotten ;  he  remembered  the  poor 
of  that  little  village  in  his  will.1 

It  was  during  his  tenure  of  the  see  of  S.  David's 
that  Laud  came  into  close  association  with  Buckingham, 
and  that  friendship  began  which  will  be  spoken  of 
later.  He  was  constantly  at  Court,  preaching  and 
in  conversation  with  James  and  Charles,  both  of 
whom  were  present  at  his  conference  with  the  Jesuit 
Fisher.  The  King  was  pleased  to  be  consulted  on 
theological  matters ;  they  discussed  a  French  Capuchin's 
book  as  to  the  Real  Presence,  and  Laud  read  over  to 
him  his  answer  to  Fisher  before  it  appeared  in  print. 
A  month  later  the  King  gave  him  the  living  of  Crick, 
in  Northamptonshire.  But  it  is  clear  that  he  was  not 
as  yet  admitted  to  the  inner  secrets  of  the  Court,  for  he 
did  not  know  of  the  Spanish  journey  until  the  Prince 
and  the  Duke  had  started,  though  he  corresponded 
constantly  with  Buckingham  during  his  absence. 

Early  in  1622  he  received  what  seems  to  have  been  his 
first  political  employment  when  he  was  "put  into  the 
Commission  of  Grievances,"  appointed  on  the  dissolution 
of  Parliament  after  the  famous  protest  of  privileges. 
Very  soon  after  he  found  that  the  Lord-Keeper,  Williams, 
Bishop  of  Lincoln,  regarded  him  with  no  favour. 
Williams  was  a  capable  man,  somewhat  too  supple  in 
his  principles,  and  eager  for  political  advancement.  As 
Lord-Keeper,  he  had  earned  high  praise  from  lawyers  as 
well  as  the  public,  though  he  was  the  successor  of  Bacon. 
When  he  had  been  appointed  to  the  see  of  Lincoln 

1  Canon  Bevan'n  Diocesan  History  of  8.  David's  contains  a  brief 
account  of  Laud's  episcopate. 


24 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


it  was  expected  that  his  deanery  of  Westminster  would 
be  given  to  Laud.  Hacket's  account  of  the  circum- 
stances, in  his  Life  of  Williams,  derived  though  it  be 
from  the  Bishop's  own  information,  is  clearly  erroneous  : 1 
though  it  may  be  that  Williams  would  rather  that  Laud 
had  S.  David's  than  Westminster,  which  he  retained 
himself  with  his  bishopric  and  his  legal  work.  What- 
ever may  be  the  truth  of  the  matter,  it  is  evident  that 
the  divergence  between  Laud  and  Williams  was  not 
yet  openly  revealed,  though  Laud  thought  it  necessary 
to  speak  of  it  to  Buckingham.2 

That  Williams  intrigued  against  Buckingham  is  the 
assertion  of  Heylin.  However  that  may  be,  the  Duke 
returned  from  Spain  as  Laud's  friend  and  the  enemy 
of  Williams.  The  history  of  the  quarrel  is  a  tangled 
one,  and  scarce  worth  elucidation.  It  is  of  more  interest 
to  observe  Iioav  Laud  regarded  it  in  his  private  thoughts. 
"  It  was  Sunday.  I  was  alone,  and  languishing  with  I 
know  not  what  sadness.  I  was  much  concerned  at  the 
envy  and  undeserved  hatred  borne  to  me  by  the  Lord 
Keeper.  I  took  into  my  hands  the  Greek  Testament, 
that  I  might  read  the  portion  of  the  day.  I  lighted  upon 
the  thirteenth  chapter  to  the  Hebrews,  wherein  that 
of  David,  Psalm  lvi.,  occurred  to  me  then  grieving  and 
fearing  :  '  The  Lord  is  my  helper :  I  will  not  fear  what 
man  can  do  unto  me.'  I  thought  an  example  was  set 
me ;  and  who  is  not  safe  under  that  shield  ?  Protect 
me,  O  my  God." J 

1  Internal  evidence  is  quite  enough  to  condemn  the  story.  I, 
am  glad  to  have  the  support  of  '  A  Romish  Recusant '  on  this 
point,  p.  Q8$qq. 

2  Diary,  October  31,  1623. 

3  The  original  entry  is  in  Latin.  Wharton  appended  the  trans- 
lation.   The  date  is  January  25,  1623-4. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


25 


It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  a  man  wlio  would  write 
thus  in  his  Diary,  could  be  guilty  of  such  ingratitude 
to  a  benefactor  as  Hacket's  account  would  imply. 

Meanwhile  Laud  was  being  gradually  introduced  into 
political  business,  and  his  energy  and  decision  of  char- 
acter were  becoming  known.  To  this  period  belongs 
his  first  record  of  a  conversation  with  Prince  Charles, 
upon  whom  he  was  afterwards  to  exercise  so  profound 
an  influence.  "  I  stood  by  him  at  supper,  where  he 
was  a  merry  talker,  and  spoke  of  many  things  by  the 
way."1  One  of  these  "obiter  dicta"  was  his  remark, 
that  he  could  never  be  a  lawyer.  "  I  cannot  defend 
a  bad  cause,  nor  yield  in  a  good  one."  His  friendship 
with  Buckingham  continued,  and  he  was  able  to 
exercise  some  influence  over  him  in  Church  matters, 
by  no  means  always  to  Abbot's  satisfaction.2  He  was 
appointed  to  consider  a  proposal  of  Buckingham's  for 
the  diversion  of  part  of  Sutton's  endowments  from  the 
Charterhouse  for  the  support  of  the  army :  he  rejected 
the  proposal  in  a  very  clear  memorandum,  still  pre- 
served at  Lambeth,3  in  which,  with  characteristic 
reverence  for  anticmity  and  charitable  bequest,  lie 
refused  to  admit  the  argument  that  the  present  abuse 
justified  a  departure  from  the  founder's  will.  "It  is 
the  greatest  work  that  hath  been  done  since  the 
Reformation  of  religion.  Will  not  therefore  the  dis- 
solving of  it  be  a  great  scandal  to  this  State  and  Church, 
and  give  the  Roman  party  just  occasion  to  triumph  ? 
Will  it  not  be  a  great  disheartening  to  all  charitable 

1  "  Multa  obiter  cum  suis."    Feb.  1,  1623-4. 
a  Cf.  Diary,  March  27  and  29,  1C24. 

3  Printed  in  Works,  vi.  1  sqq.  'Old  Carthusians'  may 
well  be  grateful  to  Laud  for  preserving  their  foundation  from 
Buckingham's  clutches. 


26 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


men  to  see  such  works  dissolved  in  the  very  age  that 
brought  them  forth  ? " 

In  his  work  on  charities,  largely  secular,  but  under- 
taken certainly  in  an  ecclesiastical  spirit,  Laud  was 
engaged  till  the  death  of  James  I.  On  March  27, 1625, 
Mid-Lent  Sunday,  as  Laud  was  preaching  at  Whitehall, 
the  news  was  spread  that  the  King  had  breathed  his 
last,  and  he  broke  off  his  sermon  in  the  midst,  inter- 
rupted by  the  sobs  of  Buckingham.  Of  the  King's  last 
hours  Laud  had  every  means  of  knowing  through  his 
old  friend  and  the  King's  physician,  Sir  William  Paddy, 
and  he  writes  that  he  made  a  brave  and  most  religious 
end.1 

Through  Buckingham,  over  whose  fickle  mind  he  had 
established  a  strong  religious  influence,  Laud  was  from 
the  first  able  to  approach  the  new  King  with  much 
greater  freedom  than  he  could  use  towards  his  father. 
Within  a  week  of  James's  death  Charles  singled  out 
Laud  for  special  favour  by  bidding  him  preach  at  the 
opening  of  Parliament ;  four  days  later  he  drew  up  for 
Buckingham  to  give  to  the  King  a  list  of  prominent 
ecclesiastics  marked  with  the  letters  O  and  P.  It  was 
clear  that  the  new  King  intended  to  be  orthodox,  and  to 
show  no  favour  to  the  Puritan  party.  From  the  first 
there  was  a  party  against  him :  he  was  already  named 
to  the  King  as  "  popishly  affected."  Puritan  fears  might 
seem  to  receive  some  countenance  when  for  the  first 
time  since  the  days  of  Mary  an  English  sovereign  was 
united  in  marriage  to  a  Romanist.    From  the  very 

1  Diary.  Cf.  Bp.  Williams1  sermon,  "  Great  Britain's  Salo- 
mon," p.  68  sqq.,  and  Sir  William  Paddy's  MS.  account  inserted 
in  the  King's  Prayer-Book,  and  preserved  in  the  library  of  S. 
John's  College.  It  is  on  the  King's  last  hours  too  that  Laud  chiefly 
dwells  in  his  Memorablts  of  King  James  (Works,  vi.  5 — 7). 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY  27 


first  coming  of  Henrietta  Maria  public  suspicion  must 
have  been  awake.  But  Laud  welcomed  her  only  with 
the  prayer,  "  God  grant  that  she  may  be  a  happy  star 
to  our  orb." 

The  sermon  that  he  was  to  have  preached  at  the 
opening  of  Parliament  was  delivered,  after  the  adjourn- 
ment, next  day  at  Whitehall.  It  was  on  Ps.  Ixxv.  2,  3, 
"When  I  shall  receive  the  congregation  I  will  judge 
according  unto  right," — a  stalwart  "  Church  and  King  " 
discourse.  The  Church  is  the  State's  support ;  together 
they  stand  or  fall.  "  It  is  not  possible  in  any  Christian 
commonwealth  that  the  Church  should  '  melt '  and  the 
State  stand  firm.  For  there  can  be  no  firmness  without 
law,  and  no  laws  can  be  binding  if  there  be  no  con- 
science to  obey  them ;  penalty  alone  could  never,  can 
never,  do  it.  And  no  school  can  teach  conscience  but 
the  Church  of  Christ."  Such  was  to  be  the  motto  of 
the  new  reign,  and  it  was  fit  therefore  that  Laud  should 
be  one  of  those  chosen  to  arrange  the  ceremonies  of  the 
coronation.1  He  was  therefore  doubly  concerned,  for 
he  was  still  a  prebendary  of  Westminster. 

More  than  this,  on  January  16,  scarcely  a  fort- 
night before  the  coronation,  he  was  appointed  to  act 
as  deputy  to  the  Dean  (his  enemy,  Bishop  Williams, 
now  in  disgrace).  In  this  capacity  he  had  important 
duties  to  perform.  The  greater  part  of  the  preparation 
within  the  Abbey  was  left  entirely  in  his  hands,  and  it 
was  his  part  to  remind  the  King  to  devote  the  eve  of 
his  coronation  to  prayer  and  meditation,  a  duty  which 
he  did  not  neglect.  That  the  details  of  the  coronation 
were  admirably  carried  out  we  have  clear  evidence. 

1  The,  Manner  of  the.  Coronation  of  Kin  J  diaries  I.,  edited  by 
C'hr.  Wordsworth,  M.A.  (Henry  Bradshaw  Society),  is  invaluable 
on  all  that  concerns  the  coronation.    See  also  Laud's  Works. 


28 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Laud's  neatness  and  accuracy  were  well  employed.  "  The 
ceremony  was  performed  without  any  interruption  and 
in  very  good  order : " 1  and  "  it  was  ono  of  the  most 
punctual  coronations  since  the  Conquest." 2 

A  special  interest  belongs  to  the  coronation,  from  the 
fact  that  the  form  used  for  the  coronation  of  James  I. 
had  been  hastily  compiled,  all  earlier  coronations  having 
been  in  Latin,  and  the  Archbishop  and  a  committee  of 
bishops  revised  the  service  for  the  occasion.  The  book 
thus  drawn  up  has  not  since  then  been  substantially 
varied.  It  is  not,  however,  to  be  regarded  as  especially 
the  work  of  Laud.  He  himself  denied  being  in  any 
way  chiefly  responsible  for  its  compilation,  and  beyond 
the  fact  of  his  known  interest  in  liturgiology,  and  the 
existence  of  copies  of  the  book  annotated  by  himself, 
there  is  nothing  to  identify  his  hand  in  it.  It  is  through- 
out according  to  the  ancient  sources. 

Laud's  special  part  in  the  coronation  lay  in  the 
ordering  of  details.  At  the  Communion  of  the  King 
he  administered  the  chalice,  and  when  the  King  had 
left  the  Abbey,  he  returned  to  the  altar  and  "  offered 
up  the  three  swords  solemnly  at  the  altar,  ad  per- 
petuum  usuin  Regni  et  honorem  Regni  et  Ecclesise." 
These  and  other  points  were  charged  against  him  at 
his  trial :  his  answer  was  throughout  an  appeal  to 
precedent. 

It  is  clear  that  so  soon  as  Laud  came  to  be  intimately 
known  to  the  King  his  influence  would  make  itself 
felt.  It  was  first  seen  in  the  case  of  Mountague. 
Richard  Mountague,  Rector  of  Stanford  Rivers,  was  a 
scholar  of  great  learning  and  a  writer  of  sharp,  trenchant 

1  MS.  note  in  Land's  own  copy  of  coronation  service. 

2  Ellis,  Original  Letters,  iii.  no.  323. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


•2!) 


English.  He  had  come  before  the  public  in  conse- 
quence of  an  anti-Roman  controversy  which  had  origin- 
ated in  his  own  parish,  and  in  which  he  had  endeavoured 
to  answer  his  opponents  after  their  own  method.  A 
Roman  writer  had  endeavoured  to  discredit  the  theology 
of  the  English  Church  by  confusing  it,  after  a  fashion 
not  unfamiliar,  with  Calvinism,  in  a  pamphlet  called 
A  Gag  for  the  Ncto  Gospel.  Mountague  retorted  with 
A  New  Gag  for  an  Old  Goose.  The  Roman  contro- 
versialist had  produced  forty-seven  propositions  which 
he  attributed  to  the  Church  of  England.  Of  these 
Mountague  allowed  only  eight  to  be  her  true  doctrine. 
The  rest  he  declared  to  be  either  undecided  or  con- 
demned by  her ;  while  some  are  "  raked  together  out 
of  the  laystalls  of  the  deepest  puritanism."  The  aim 
of  Mountague's  writing  was  one  with  which  moderate 
men  would  sympathize :  "  An  impartial  judgment,"  it 
has  been  said  by  the  highest  living  authority,  "  will 
probably  consider  it  as  a  temperate  exposition  of  the 
reasons  which  were  leading  an  increasing  body  of 
scholars  to  reject  the  doctrines  of  Rome  and  of  Geneva 
alike."  1  Had  its  theological  position  been  expressed 
in  the  usual  language  of  theologians,  it  would  scarce 
have  aroused  even  a  theological  tempest.  But  its  sting 
lay  in  the  popularity,  if  not  vulgarity,  of  the  diction. 
Mountague  descended  from  the  rostrum,  like  Wyclif,  to 
enter  the  arena.  In  a  few  weeks  all  was  dust  and  con- 
fusion. A  Puritan  House  of  Commons  could  neither 
tolerate  nor  ignore  an  attack  which  seemed  so  flagrant 
and  so  flippant.  And  the  storm  was  by  no  means 
calmed  by  Mountague's  publication  of  a  treatise  on  the 
Invocation  of  Saints,  and  of  another  popular  anti- 

1  Gardiner,  History  of  England,  vol.  v.,  p.  352. 


30 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Puritan  pamphlet,  Ajrpello  Caesarem.  During  the  last 
year  of  his  life  James  had  declined  to  censure  Moun- 
tague's  earlier  writings.  "  If  that  is  to  be  a  papist," 
he  said,  "so  am  I  a  papist."  The  Ajypello  Caesarem 
had  been  referred  by  James  within  a  month  of  his 
death  to  Dr.  White,  Dean  of  Carlisle,  Laud's  com- 
panion in  the  controversy  with  Fisher,  who  found 
"nothing  therein  but  what  is  agreeable  to  the  public 
faith,  doctrine,  and  discipline  established  in  the  Church 
of  England ; "  and  Laud,  with  Buckeridge  and  Howson, 
had  written  to  ask  Buckingham's  support  when 
Mountague  was  attacked  by  the  Commons. 

Charles,  with  his  usual  rashness,  at  the  very  crisis  of 
the  Commons'  onslaught,  made  Mountague  his  chaplain, 
and  declared  that  he  would  protect  him.  The  Commons 
did  not  desist.  The  King  appointed  a  commission  of 
bishops  to  report  on  Mountague's  opinion.  Montaigne, 
Neile,  Andrewes,  Buckeridge,  and  Laud — no  bad  judges 
— decided  in  his  favour.  Then  a  conference — after  the 
manner  of  Laud's  own  conference  with  Fisher — was  held ; 
but  it  convinced  no  one.  Eventually  Mountague  was 
made  Bishop  of  Chichester  in  the  teeth  of  the  Commons' 
denunciations.  In  all  this  Laud  had  played  a  prominent 
part.  He  had  convinced  himself  that  the  claim  of  the 
English  Church  to  speak  with  the  voice  of  historic 
theology  was  concerned  in  Mountague's  case,  and  he 
threw  himself,  without  a  thought  of  the  consequences, 
into  the  strife.  This,  his  first  active  intervention  in  the 
very  centre  of  the  ecclesiastical  contests  of  the  day,  and 
his  first  open  conflict  with  the  Puritans  in  the  Com- 
mons, is  characteristic  of  his  whole  life.  Tolerant  by 
conviction,  and  claiming  wide  liberty  for  others  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  Anglican  formularies,  he  yet  could 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY  31 


conceive  of  no  sound  foundation  but  what  was  built 
upon  the  historic  Christianity  of  the  Church.  To  pre- 
serve that  he  would  sacrifice  anything :  and  in  none  of 
the  battles  in  which  he  was  afterwards  to  be  engaged 
did  he  count  the  cost,  or  consider  for  one  moment  the 
personal  unpopularity  which  would  attach  to  himself. 
As  soon  as  he  had  decided  upon  the  right  course,  the 
question  of  his  conduct  was  for  him  unalterably  settled. 
Thus  he  managed  to  divert  upon  his  own  head  much 
of  the  wrath  originally  intended  for  those  whose  cause 
he  chivalrously  espoused.  But  the  further  Laud  was 
estranged  from  the  Puritan  Commons  the  nearer  he 
was  drawn  to  the  King.  Constantly,  as  his  Diary  shows, 
in  Buckingham's  house,  he  became  gradually  introduced 
into  the  inner  circle  of  government.  He  was  set  to  con- 
sider of  the  religious  aspect  of  the  strange  project  of 
one  Oventrout,  who  "  proposed  to  show  a  way  how  the 
West  Indies  might  shake  off  the  yoke  of  Spain,  and  put 
themselves  under  the  subjection  of  our  King  Charles." 
His  record  of  the  affair  ends  quaintly.  "  We  dismissed 
the  man,  and  returned  not  a  whit  the  wiser." 

That  his  influence  was  at  work  with  the  King  is  clear 
from  the  constant  references  that  we  now  find  made  to 
religious  questions.  The  Court  as  well  as  the  Com- 
mons was  keenly  alive  to  theological  interests.  Was 
Bishop  Goodman  of  Gloucester  teaching  Roman  doctrine  ? 
Abbot,  Neile,  Andrewes,  and  Laud  were  to  consider. 
Even  the  excitement  of  the  impeachment  of  Bucking- 
ham did  not  diminish  the  attention  paid  to  Church 
matters.  The  King  chid  the  bishops  "that  in  this  time 
of  Parliament  we  were  silent  in  the  cause  of  the  Church, 
and  did  not  make  known  to  him  what  might  be  useful, 
or  was  prejudicial  to  the  Church,  professing  himself 


32 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


ready  to  promote  the  cause  of  the  Church."  In  the 
midst  of  all  the  domestic  troubles  and  the  foreign 
dangers,  Charles  promoted  Laud  to  the  bishopric  of 
Bath  and  Wells.1  On  the  death  of  Andrewes  two 
months  later,  Laud  became  Dean  of  the  Chapel  Royal. 
In  this  office  he  came  still  nearer  to  the  King.  It  was 
his  part  to  order  the  services  in  the  royal  chapels,  and 
there  within  a  very  short  time  Laud  worked  an  im- 
portant reformation.  It  had  been  the  custom  since 
James  I.  came  to  the  throne,  to  cut  off  the  prayers 
whenever  the  King  entered  the  chapel,  and  proceed  at 
once  to  anthem  and  sermon.  "  I  desired  his  Majesty," 
says  the  Diary,  "  that  he  would  please  to  be  present  at 
prayers  2  as  well  as  sermon  every  Sunday,  and  that  at 
whatsoever  part  of  the  prayers  he  came,  the  priest  then 
officiating  might  proceed  to  the  end  of  the  prayers.  The 
most  religious  King  not  only  assented,  but  also  gave  me 
thanks." 

From  this  date  we  may  still  more  certainly  assume 
that  the  religious  policy  of  Charles  was  practically 
dictated  by  Laud.  Thus  it  was  agreed,  contrary  to 
Williams's  advice,  that  Bishop  Andrewes'  letters  to  Du 
Moulin,  "  concerning  bishops  that  they  are  jure  divino," 
should  be  published — as  they  were  in  1629  by  Bucke- 
ridge  and  Laud.  Thus  it  was  that  Sibthorp's  sermon, 
revised  it  is  true,  was  published,  containing  the  strongest 
statements  of  the  Divine  right  of  kings,  in  spite  of 
Abbot's  protest  that  it  contained  statements  contrary  to 
the  laws  of  the  realm.  Thus  it  was  that  Manwaring, 
whom  Parliament  censured,  received  from  the  Crown 

1  Congd  d'elive,  July  20,  1626  ;  August  16,  election  ;  Sept.  18, 
confirmation  ;  Sept.  19,  Laud  did  homage  (Wells  Cath.  MSS.  and 
Laud's  Diary). 

2  Lyturgiae.    Is  Laud  speaking  of  the  Holy  Communion  ? 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


33 


both  pardon  and  promotion.  Thus  it  was  that  Williams 
remained  in  disgrace,  and  that  Abbot  himself  was 
sequestered  from  office.  In  politics  Laud  stood  by  the 
King's  side.  He  wrote  the  speeches  which  Charles 
delivered  on  behalf  of  Buckingham,  and  corrected  Buck- 
ingham's own  defence.  And  Laud  himself  became 
Bishop  of  London  at  the  very  time  when  the  outcry 
against  him  in  the  Commons  was  loudest.  Yet  he 
remained  unconscious  of  the  feeling  which  was  excited ; 
of  the  discussion  in  the  Lords  he  wrote,  "  By  God's 
goodness  towards  me  I  was  fully  cleared  in  the  House." 
On  July  15,  1628,  he  was  translated  to  London.  On 
August  23  Buckingham  was  assassinated.  The  news 
reached  Laud  the  next  day  as  he  was  consecrating 
Mountague  to  the  bishopric  of  Chichester. 

From  the  death  of  Buckingham  Laud  stood  almost 
alone.  His  friendship  with  Strafford  was  kept  up  almost 
entirely  by  letters.  At  Court  he  had  no  one  with 
whom  he  was  entirely  intimate,  and  self-contained 
though  he  was,  he  felt  the  need  of  support.  Two  years 
later  he  was  able  to  secure  the  appointment  of  his  old 
friend  Windebanke,  with  whom  he  had  so  often  stayed 
at  Haines  Hill,  to  be  Secretary  of  State,  and  a  month 
later,  "Juxon  was  at  my  suit  sworn  Clerk  of  his  Majesty's 
Closet,  that  I  might  have  one  that  I  might  trust  near 
his  Majesty  if  I  grow  weak  and  infirm." 

During  the  five  years  in  which  Laud  remained  Bishop 
of  London  he  was  engaged  to  the  full  in  political  busi- 
ness ;  but  he  was  able  also  more  thoroughly  to  devote 
himself  to  his  ecclesiastical  charge.  To  this  period  also 
belongs  much  of  his  work  on  behalf  of  the  University 
of  Oxford. 

In  politics  he  scanned  closely  the  action  of  the  House 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


of  Commons.  A  copy  of  Rudyerd's  famous  speech  call- 
ing for  the  republication  of  Magna  Carta,  exists  in  the 
Record  Office,  in  the  writing  of  Bishop  Harsnet,  anno- 
tated by  Laud.1  There  also  may  be  seen  a  list  of  eight 
Bills  which  the  Parliament  of  1628,  according  to  Laud, 
intended  to  pass  "  against  the  Church." 2  His  own 
political  theories  and  political  action  are  worthy  of 
separate  consideration.  The  greater  part  of  his  ecclesi- 
astical policy  may  also  more  fitly  be  considered  later. 
This  much,  however,  may  be  said  here.  He  was  now 
able  to  carry  out  the  greater  part  of  the  aims  which  he 
had  long  had  at  heart.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
the  closest  of  these  to  his  heart  was  the  reformation  of 
the  Church.  The  clergy  of  his  new  diocese  urged  him 
to  begin  from  below.3  But  he  was  never  afraid  of 
striking  at  high  game.  Through  his  influence,  no 
doubt — for  the  draft  letter  exists  in  Laud's  writing 4 — 
Charles  ordered  Abbot  to  command  all  the  bishops 
to  retire  to  their  sees,  "  those  only  excepted  whose 
attendance  at  Court  is  necessarily  required."  There- 
by it  was  intended  to  avoid  the  "  ill  example  "  to  "  the 
inferior  clergymen,  and  the  hindrance  of  God's  service 
and  the  King's."  Laud  had  himself  not  spent  much 
time  in  his  dioceses;  but  he  had  the  excuse  of  Court 
business,  and  he  had  certainly  done  as  much  by  a 
month's  residence  as  most  of  the  other  bishops  in  a 
year. 

In  1633  he  went  with  the  King  to  Scotland,  and 
came  still  nearer  to  his  most  intimate  designs.  He  had 
long  been  Primate  in  all  but  name :  as  early  as  1626 

1  Col.  State  Papers,  1628-9,  p.  92. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  129. 

3  Ibid.,  1629,  Nov.  17. 

4  Ibid.,  1629,  May  13. 


FROM  READING  TO  CANTERBURY 


35 


Buckingham  had  told  him  of  the  King's  intentions  for 
the  next  vacancy.  Abbot  died  on  August  4,  1633,  and 
on  the  6th  Charles  greeted  the  Bishop  of  London  with 
the  words,  "  My  Lord's  Grace  of  Canterbury,  you  are 
very  welcome." 


CHAPTER  II. 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS. 

Laud's  public  life  seems  to  overpower  and  dwarf  bis 
personal  history.  We  know  little  of  how  he  lived  in 
his  own  house,  or  of  what  were  his  deepest  intimacies. 
It  is  difficult  to  imagine  him  at  home,  in  his  study  or 
his  garden,  in  any  of  his  dwellings  which  still  remain. 
At  Oxford  his  own  work  transformed  his  college  com- 
pletely from  the  appearance  it  must  have  borne  when 
he  was  a  resident,  nor  is  there  any  record  of  the  room 
in  which  he  lived.  Book-cases  known  to  have  been  his 
still  remain,  but  they  belong  to  a  date  after  he  had 
left  Oxford.  At  Gloucester,  or  Wells,  or  Fulham,  as 
well  as  at  Croydon,  there  are  other  memories  to  dispute 
the  ground  with  his.  Abergwili  is  much  altered : 
Lambeth  is  changed  beyond  recognition ;  the  Lollard's 
Tower  and  the  gateway  stand  incongruously  by  the  side 
of  the  modern  building,  and  the  chapel  would  not  be 
known  for  the  place  which  Prynne  and  the  accusers  so 
keenly  scrutinized.  His  picture,  the  shell  of  his  tortoise, 
books  and  papers  that  were  his,  preserve  his  memory ; 
but  a  modern  student  is  brought  most  near  to  Laud  in 
the  library,  among  the  official  records  of  his  primacy,  or 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


37 


tlie  faded  letters  which  he  so  carefully  endorsed  and 
preserved. 

His  person  in  his  habit  as  he  lived  it  is  not  hard  to 
recall.  The  two  busts  at  S.  John's,1  made  in  1633,  both 
probably  the  work  of  Hubert  le  Sueur,  the  almost 
innumerable  portraits,  attributed  with  more  or  less 
rashness  to  Vandyke,  the  medal  struck  to  commemorate 
his  martyrdom,2  the  miniatures  and  engravings,  the 
rough  cuts  that  adorn  the  countless  libels  against  him, 
enable  us  to  draw  a  clear  picture  of  his  appearance. 
He  was  short  and  strongly  built,  but  thin  except  in  the 
face,  which  was  plump  and  rosy  to  the  day  of  his  death. 
A  trim  pointed  beard  and  moustache,  bright  peering 
eyes,  heavy  eyebrows,  close-cropt  white  hair,  give  a 
marked  individuality  to  the  portraits.  Alertness  and 
determination  seem  the  chief  characteristics,  and  a 
cheery  optimism  that  delights  to  plan  and  has  confidence 
in  the  present.  He  looks,  as  his  life  shows  him  to  have 
been,  active,  inquiring,  assimilative,  not  original,  but  of 
a  strength  and  impressiveness  which  originality  often 
lacks.  Certainly  the  face  is  kindly,  and  as  certainly 
it  is  full  of  intellectual  keenness.  It  would  arrest 
attention  anywhere,  but  it  would  not  compel  admiration, 
perhaps  hardly  solicit  friendship.3 

1  One  is  in  the  President's  lodging,  one  in  the  library. 

2  See  below,  p.  227. 

3  The  portraits  of  Laud  are  very  numerous.  The  three  best 
known  are  the  fine  portraits  in  S.  John's  College  Library,  at 
Lambeth,  and  in  the  Hermitage  Gallery,  S.  Petersburg.  The 
last  was  at  one  time  the  property  of  Sir  Robert  Walpole,  and  was 
engraved  while  it  was  at  Houghton.  It  was  sold  to  Catherine  II. 
of  Russia.  The  Lambeth  portrait  was  unquestionably  there  in 
Laud's  own  day,  and  one  of  the  S.  John's  pictures  is  also  most 
probably  authentic.  Another,  probably  referred  to  in  a  letter  to 
Strafford,  is  not  by  Vandyke  (Works,  vii.  295).  The  S.  Peters- 
burg portrait  has  perhaps  the  best  claim  to  be  considered  entirely 


38 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Yet  after  all  Laud  was  certainly  a  homely  man.  His 
letters  show  him  full  of  jest  and  quaintness.  He  likes 
Yorkshire  beef  and  "  hung  venison  " ;  he  is  grateful  for 
a  present  of  dried  fish ;  he  thanks  Strafford  for  the 
marten's  fur,  which  will  keep  him  warm  in  winter ;  he 
hopes  that  a  lady  who  sends  him  a  cat  "  does  not  mean 
to  scratch  her  friends  by  such  tokens."  When  he  felt 
at  ease  with  a  friend  he  spoke  freely.  We  may  wonder 
what  the  staid  officials  of  the  Court  would  have  thought 
had  they  known  how  merrily  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury and  the  Lord-Deputy  of  Ireland  were  writing 
about  them — about  the  idleness  and  self-seeking  of  the 
ministers,  of  Cottington's  iniquities  and  the  Archbishop 
of  Cashel's  "  sciatica  in  the  conscience."  For  a  busy 
man, — and  few  modern  officials  have  more  work  than 
Laud  had, — he  writes  very  naturally  and  freely;  and, 
weary  though  he  often  was,  he  never  made  his  labours 
an  excuse  for  neglecting  an  act  of  kindness.  Work, 
however,  seems  to  have  told  upon  his  health  and  his 
temper.  He  was  a  sickly  infant,  and  a  weak  and 
ailing  lad  at  Oxford ;  and  when  he  grew  older  he  was 
constantly  ill.  He  twice  broke  a  sinew  of  his  right  leg, 
and  was  laid  up  for  a  long  time.    He  was  easily  made 

the  work  of  Vandyke,  but  the  others,  and  many  more  that  are  to 
be  found  in  colleges,  private  houses,  and  palaces  or  institutions 
with  which  Laud  was  connected,  have  some  touches  that  suggest 
the  hand  of  the  great  master.  There  are  a  great  number  of  copies  ; 
almost  all  retain  the  attitude  and  style  of  the  famous  pictures. 
The  Bishop  of  S.  David's  has  an  interesting  portrait  at  Abergwili, 
which  differs  somewhat  from  those  better  known. 

Among  the  engraving?  Hollar's  print  is  the  best.  The  libels  are 
often  curious  but  recognizable  distortions.  The  rare  portrait  "with 
the  Chain,"  a  rough,  vulgar  sketch,  is  mentioned  by  Laud  himself. 
"  The  Recantation  of  the  Prelate  of  Canterbury  "  (1641)  contains  a 
not  unpleasing  portrait  representing  Laud  probably  in  his  ordinary 
house  dress,  a  cassock,  ruff  and  skull-cap.    (See  p.  192,  note.) 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS  39 


ill,  and  yet  his  constitution  was  capable  of  great 
endurance.  As  an  old  man  his  physical  strength  amid 
all  the  anxieties  of  his  imprisonment  and  his  trial  was 
amazing.  His  bold  heart  and  strong  nerve  carried  him 
through  times  of  stress  which  would  have  broken  down 
robuster  men.  Like  most  students  and  sedentary  men 
of  business,  he  made  occasional  and  spasmodic  efforts 
to  take  exercise.  When  he  was  detained  indoors  he 
would  "  swing  a  book  for  exercise,"  and  so  injudiciously 
as  to  strain  himself  seriously.  He  would  walk  for  hours 
in  the  garden  at  Lambeth,  and  often  transact  his  busi- 
ness the  while.  At  his  trial  he  did  not  deny  that  he 
played  bowls,  though  he  did  disclaim  that  he  played  them 
like  Calvin  on  Sunday.  He  would  ride  too  on  occasion. 
Newcastle,  master  in  the  art  of  equitation,  gave  him  "  a 
fine  great  horse,"  and  Strafford  a  "  Dutch  pad,"  a 
saddle  so  rich  that  he  thought  a  bishop  should  not  in 
"  this  age  "  use  it. 

Weak  health  in  a  busy  man  naturally  shows  itself 
in  a  hasty  or  querulous  temper.  Laud  unquestionably 
was  passionate  in  retort,  and  easily  irritated  by  triflers 
and  busybodies.  Whatever  be  the  true  story  of  his 
quarrel  with  Archie  Armstrong,  the  King's  fool,  it 
shows  that  when  weighty  anxieties  pressed  upon  him 
he  would  not  stay  to  treat  folly  gently.1  Many  of  the 
complaints  of  his  action  in  the  Star  Chamber  or  High 
Commission  were  due  to  his  hasty  vehemence  of  lan- 
guage. Much  that  was  charged  against  him  was  ex- 
aggerated no  doubt ;  but  an  archbishop  should  not  even 
seem  to  lose  his  temper  in  a  public  place. 

1  The  facts  are  best  put  in  Mr.  Reynolds's  edition  of  Seidell's 
Table  Talk,  p.  62.  'A  Romish  Recusant'  repeats  the  story  in  the 
form  which  tells  most  against  Laud. 


40 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


When  a  troublesome  minister  named  Culmer,  a  man 
of  no  very  dignified  or  pleasant  character,  came  troubling 
him  with  questions  for  consideration,  he  was  said  to 
have  replied,  "  Consideration — I'll  take  nothing  into 
consideration ;  and  if  you  conform  not  all  the  sooner, 
I'll  take  a  more  round  course  with  you."  1  Clarendon 
admits  his  "unpopular  natural  infirmities,"  the  "greatest 
of  which,"  he  says,  "  was  (besides  a  hasty,  sharp  way  of 
expressing  himself)  that  he  believed  innocence  of  heart 
and  integrity  of  manners  was  a  guard  strong  enough 
to  secure  any  man  in  his  voyage  through  this  world." 
He  was,  in  fact,  an  honest  man  himself,  and  was  in- 
tolerant to  rudeness  of  anything  that  did  not  seem 
straightforward  in  those  with  whom  he  had  to  deal. 
That  Heylin  repeats  much  criticism  may  be  taken  to 
prove  at  least  the  sharpness  of  his  manner.  The 
roughness  of  his  uncourtly  nature,  the  small  command 
he  had  of  his  passion,  his  neglect  of  civility  to  the 
nobility,  his  dislike  of  all  ostentation  and  show — all 
these  told  against  him  in  an  age  and  a  Court  where 
forms  were  so  greatly  regarded.  He  lived  a  lonely  life. 
He  had  no  wife  or  near  kin  with  him  to  calm  his 
humours  and  minister  to  his  weariness.  No  intimate 
friend  ever  lived  in  his  house.  He  had  but  little  time 
for  quiet  converse,  and  few,  if  any,  who  would  give  him 
advice.  When  it  was  given  he  was  grateful  for  it, 
with  a  sort  of  half-satirical  pathos  of  self-condemnation, 
which  appears  in  Clarendon's  account  of  an  occasion  when 
he  was  made  to  hear  home-truths.  Young  Mr.  Hyde, 
always  well-meaning  if  a  little  officious,  thought  it  would 
be  well  that  the  Archbishop  should  hear  what  men  said 
of  him,  and  took  upon  himself  to  tutor  the  Primate. 

1  Deposition  of  Culmer,  Cal.  Stat.  Pap.,  Dom.,  1643-4,  p.  15. 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


4] 


"  He  found  the  Archbishop "  1 — the  passage  is  so 
characteristic  and  so  illuminative  that  it  may  well  be 
quoted  here — "  early  walking  in  the  garden,  who 
received  him  very  graciously,  and  continuing  his  walk, 
asked  him,  'What  good  news  in  the  country  ? '  to  which 
he  answered,  '  there  was  none  good ;  the  people  were 
universally  discontented,  and  (which  troubled  him  most) 
that  many  people  spoke  extreme  ill  of  his  Grace,  as  the 
cause  of  all  that  was  amiss.'  He  replied,  '  that  he  was 
sorry  for  it :  he  knew  he  did  not  deserve  it ;  and  that 
he  must  not  wive  over  serving  the  King  and  the  Church 
to  please  the  people,  who  otherwise  would  not  speak 
well  of  him.'  Mr.  Hyde  told  him,  '  he  thought  he  need 
not  lessen  his  zeal  for  either ;  and  that  it  grieved  him 
to  find  persons  of  the  best  condition,  and  who  loved 
both  King  and  Church,  exceedingly  indevoted  to  him, 
complaining  of  his  manner  of  treating  them  when  they 
had  occasion  to  resort  to  him,  it  may  be  for  his  direc- 
tions.' And  then  named  him  two  persons  of  the  most 
interest  and  credit  in  Wiltshire,  who  had  that  summer 
attended  the  Council  Board  in  some  affairs  which  con- 
cerned the  King  and  the  country;  that  all  the  Lords 
present  used  them  with  great  courtesy,  knowing  well 
their  quality  and  reputation,  but  that  he  alone  spake 
very  sharply  to  them,  and  without  anything  of  grace, 
at  which  they  were  much  troubled ;  and  one  of  them, 
supposing  that  somebody  had  done  him  ill  offices,  went 
the  next  morning  to  Lambeth,  to  present  his  service  to 
him,  and  to  discover  if  he  could  what  misrepresentation 
had  been  made  of  him :  that  after  he  had  attended  very 
long,  he  was  admitted  to  speak  with  his  Grace,  who, 
scarce  hearing  him,  sharply  answered  him,  that  '  he  had 
1  Clarendon's  Life,  Oxford,  1759,  vol.  i.,  p.  62  sqq. 


42 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


no  leisure  for  compliments/  and  so  hurried  away;  which 
put  the  other  gentleman  much  out  of  countenance. 
And  that  this  kind  of  behaviour  of  his  was  the  discourse 
of  all  companies  of  persons  of  quality,  every  man  con- 
tinuing any  such  story  with  another  like  it,  very  much 
to  his  disadvantage,  and  to  the  trouble  of  those  who 
were  very  just  to  him." 

These  were  home-truths  indeed,  but  Laud  was  very 
humble  under  the  criticism ;  he  "  heard  the  relation 
very  patiently,  and  discoursed  over  every  particular 
with  all  manuer  of  condescension,  and  said,  with 
evident  show  of  trouble,  that  '  he  was  very  unfortunate 
to  be  so  ill  understood ;  that  he  meant  very  well ;  that 
he  remembered  the  time  when  those  two  persons  were 
with  the  Council ;  that  upon  any  deliberations,  when 
anything  was  resolved,  or  to  be  said  to  anybody,  the 
Council  enjoined  him  to  deliver  their  resolutions,  which 
he  did  always  according  to  the  best  of  his  understand- 
ing; but  of  the  imperfection  he  had  by  nature,  which 
he  said  often  troubled  him,  he  might  deliver  it  in  such 
a  tune,  and  with  a  sharpness  of  voice,  that  made  men 
believe  he  was  angry,  when  there  was  no  such  thing ; 
that  when  those  gentlemen  were  there,  and  he  had 
delivered  what  he  was  to  say,  they  made  some  stay, 
and  spake  with  some  of  the  Lords,  which  not  being 
according  to  order,  he  thought  he  gave  them  some 
reprehension,  they  having  at  that  time  very  much  other 
business  to  do ;  that  he  did  very  well  remember,  that 
one  of  them  (who  was  a  person  of  honour)  came  after- 
wards to  him,  at  a  time  he  was  shut  up  about  an  affair 
of  importance  which  required  his  full  thoughts,  but 
that  as  soon  as  he  heard  of  the  other's  being  without, 
he  sent  for  him,  himself  going  into  the  next  room,  and 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS  43 


received  him  very  kindly,  as  he  thought ;  and  sup- 
posing that  he  came  about  business,  asked  him  what 
his  business  was ;  and  the  other  answering  that  he  had 
no  business,  but  continuing  his  address  with  some 
ceremony,  he  had  indeed  said  that  he  had  not  time 
for  compliments;  but  he  did  not  think  that  he  went 
out  of  the  room  in  that  manner;  and  concluded  that 
it  was  not  possible  for  him  in  the  many  occupations 
he  had  to  spend  any  time  in  unnecessary  compliments ; 
and  that  if  his  integrity  and  uprightness,  which  never 
should  be  liable  to  reproach,  could  not  be  strong  enough 
to  preserve  him,  he  must  submit  to  God's  pleasure." 
When  Hyde  pressed  him  further  he  answered  with  a 
smile,  that  "  he  could  only  answer  for  his  heart,  that 
he  had  very  good  meaning;  for  his  tongue,  he  could 
not  undertake  that  he  would  not  sometimes  speak 
more  hastily  and  sharply  than  he  should  do  (which 
oftentimes  he  was  sorry  and  reprehended  himself  for), 
and  in  a  time  which  might  be  liable  to  misinterpreta- 
tion, with  them  who  were  not  very  well  acquainted 
with  him,  and  so  knew  that  it  was  an  infirmity  which 
his  nature  and  education  had  so  rooted  in  him  that  it 
was  in  vain  to  contend  with  it." 

Heylin's  description  well  harmonizes  with  Claren- 
don's, but  it  is  more  intimate  and  more  enthusiastic. 
"  Of  apprehension  he  was  quick  and  sudden,  of  a  very 
sociable  wit  and  a  pleasant  humour  ;  and  one  that  knew 
as  well  how  to  put  off  the  gravity  of  his  place  and 
person  when  he  saw  occasion,  as  any  man  living ; 
accessible  enough  at  all  times,  but  when  he  was  tired 
out  with  multiplicity  and  vexation  of  business,  which 
some,  who  did  not  understand  him,  ascribed  unto  the 
natural  ruggedness  of  his  disposition  .  .  .  constant  not 


1 1 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


only  to  the  public  prayers  in  his  chapel,  but  to  his 
private  devotions  in  his  closet."  1  He  was  a  busy  man, 
with  little  time  for  recreation.  His  rest  and  refreshment 
was  in  the  fixed  hours  of  prayer ;  then  alone  could  he 
not  be  intruded  upon ;  there,  in  his  chapel,  he  could 
renew  his  strength  and  his  patience. 

Yet  with  all  this  business  and  this  devotion  he  was 
as  little  an  ascetic  as  he  was  a  worldling.  He  lived 
by  rule,  but  by  rule  which  became  an  enthusiasm.  He 
obeyed  the  English  Church  implicitly :  his  greatest 
wish  was  fully  to  observe  her  rules.  And  this  became 
a  delight.  He  loved,  one  might  say,  every  stone  of  the 
ancient  fabric.  He  was  not  at  all  a  mystic,  but  he  was 
a  truly  pious  man,  to  whom  the  language  of  the  Bible, 
of  the  ancient  collects  and  the  English  service-books, 
and  the  intimate  thoughts  of  private  prayer,  were  the 
very  breath  of  life. 

This  only  could  preserve  him  in  a  Court  so  full  of 
selfishness  and  deceit.  He  had  indeed  to  go  warily, 
though  he  never  ceased  to  walk  boldly.  There  was  no 
reliance  to  be  placed  anywhere,  certainly  not  upon  the 
King.  "  But  then  I  have  nothing  but  the  King's  word 
to  me ;  and  should  he  forget  or  deny  it,  where  is  my 
remedy  ? "  2  The  Queen  with  her  Roman  intrigues  was 
a  constant  difficulty — "a  cunning  and  practising  woman  " 
the  Archbishop  did  not  hesitate  to  call  her.  A  life  of 
extreme  simplicity,  and  with  fixed  times  of  work  and 
devotion — this  was  his  safeguard  in  a  Court  society 
which  might  ensnare  even  where  it  could  not  attract. 

Often,  one  may  think,  his  only  relief,  after  a  weary 
day  of  labour  and  contention,  was  to  sit  down  and  write 

1  Cypriawus  Anglicus,  p.  542. 

2  To  Strafford,  Jan  23,  1636.    Laud's  Works,  vii.  211. 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


45 


the  long  record  of  his  troubles  to  the  only  friend  who 
could  truly  share  them.  "  I  am  very  weary,"  he  would 
say  to  Strafford,  and  "  I  have  had  all  manner  of  provoca- 
tions put  upon  me." 

That  such  a  man,  so  restless  by  nature  and  by 
necessity,  should  dream  often  and  strangely  is  not 
wonderful.  May  it  not  have  been  some  quaint  humour 
which  made  him  jot  down  the  curious  visions  that  came 
to  him  as  he  slept  ?  They  do  not  read  seriously.  There 
is  nothing  to  show  that  he  seriously  regarded  them  when 
he  came  to  act.  If  there  was  superstition  in  recording 
them,  it  was  the  gentle  superstition  which  children  learn 
traditionally  from  their  kinsfolk.  "  They  have,"  thought 
Carlyle,  "an  affectionate,  lovable  kind  of  character." 
They  touch  indeed  every  side  of  his  thoughts — the 
humours  of  a  Court,  the  grim  and  gloomy  outlook  of 
the  times,  political  difficulties,  the  love  of  friends,  the 
Christian  solace  that  was  nearest  to  his  heart — "  my 
dream  of  my  Blessed  Lord  and  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ. 
One  of  the  most  comfortable  passages  that  ever  I  had 
in  my  life." 

It  is  a  poor  criticism  indeed  that  must  find  its 
evidence  in  a  private  diary  and  its  sharpest  satires  in 
the  world  of  dreams.  Laud  was  a  busy,  weary  man : 
when  he  slept  his  troubles  did  not  desert  him  ;  when  he 
woke,  in  those  few  idle  moments  when  he  could  find 
time  to  write,1  he  put  down  the  quaint  remembrances  in 
which  the  night  gave  some  relief  to  the  day's  continued 
toil. 

The  personal  interests  of  a  man  so  busy  were  naturally 
simple.     He  loved  his  garden,  and  his  birds,  and  his 
music :  he  did  not  care  for  state  or  dignity  or  pomp. 
1  The  Diary  was  very  irregularly  kept,  and  very  briefly. 


46 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


"  I'll  tell  you  a  pretty  story  by  the  bye,"  he  writes  to 
Strafford,  "and  'tis  true.  When  I  first  came  to  Lam- 
beth, there  were  in  the  walks  song-thrushes,  which  ever 
began  to  sing  in  February,  and  so  continued,  and  the 
nightingales  followed  in  their  season.  Both  of  these 
came  my  first  year,  I  think  to  take  their  leave,  for 
neither  of  them  hath  appeared  ever  since."  1  His  visita- 
tion articles  and  his  particular  directions  to  cathedrals 
show  a  knowledge  of  church  music  and  its  requirements 
which  could  not  have  been  second-hand.  His  will  men- 
tions instruments  that  he  had  at  Lambeth  and  at  Croydon, 
his  harp  and  chest  of  viols,  and  "  the  harpsico  in  the 
parlour  at  Lambeth." 

But  his  chiefest  interests  were  undoubtedly  those  of 
a  scholar.  He  was  always  a  book-lover.  Rare  editions, 
unique  manuscripts,  rich  bindings — the  delights  of  the 
bibliophile — his  own  collections  as  well  as  his  literary 
remains  show  him  to  have  been  keenly  interested  in. 
At  the  time  of  Charles's  coronation,  his  old  friend 
Bishop  Neile,  who  had  always  found  him  a  lodging,  had 
to  give  up  his  house  to  the  French  Ambassador;  the 
Diary  records  the  care  with  which  he  himself  arranged 
his  books  in  their  new  home.  His  letters  contain  con- 
stant reference  to  the  purchase  of  rare  books.  He  made 
ambassadors  and  merchants  collectors  for  him  ;  but  with 
an  unselfishness  rare  among  virtuosos,  he  gave  his 
choicest  treasures — it  would  seem  from  his  will  almost 
all  he  had,  though  he  still  had  many  liturgies,  which,  it 
would  seem,  were  his  favourite  study — while  he  still  lived 
to  public  libraries  and  private  friends.  He  had  a  taste 
for  art.  He  could  talk  of  Vandyke  with  the  King  and 
Strafford  :  he  knew  the  value  of  pictures  and  of  medals. 
1  Wwks,  vii.  416. 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


47 


He  had  indeed  many  of  the  characteristics  of  the  great 
prelates  of  the  Renaissance,  with  just  that  change 
which  its  ideas  underwent  on  English  soil.  He  was  a 
great  builder  and  a  patron  of  art,  a  scholar  and  a  poli- 
tician, a  priest  with  a  love  of  comely  order  and  the 
seemly  dignities  of  public  worship.  He  delighted  to 
read  and  to  control  the  literature  of  the  day  :  he  would 
accept  dedications  and  encourage  struggling  writers. 
There  was  a  certain  formality  about  it  all,  viewed  from 
without,  a  sort  of  sober  stateliness  of  pose  such  as  the 
Italian  painters  give  to  their  church  ceremonials  and 
the  backgrounds  of  their  cardinals.  But  with  Laud  there 
was  a  more  than  English  impatience  at  any  ceremonial 
that  was  meaningless,  and  there  was,  behind  all,  the  deep 
piety  that  let  no  touch  of  paganism  from  scholarship  or 
art  enter  into  the  scheme  of  his  life. 

Such  was  Laud  as  we  know  him  in  himself.  We 
may  learn  something  more  from  his  association  with 
those  who  came  nearest  to  his  heart.  His  deepest 
friendships  were  with  the  two  most  prominent  politicians 
among  his  contemporaries  in  the  service  of  the  Crown. 
Minute  investigation,  which  has  done  so  much  to 
rehabilitate  the  character  of  maligned  ministers,  has 
done  little  if  anything  to  raise  the  reputation  of 
George  Villiers.  Rash,  violent,  and  constantly  swayed 
by  the  swift  currents  of  his  passions  and  his  sympathies, 
Buckingham  was  perhaps  the  least  fitted  to  guide  the 
policy  of  a  great  nation  of  all  those  who  have  ever 
been  kings'  friends.  His  personal  defects  were  no  less 
obvious  than  his  public  deficiencies.  But  at  the  same 
time  it  is  impossible  to  deny  that  the  extraordinary 
fascination  which  he  exercised  over  some  of  the  worthiest 
as  well  as  the  greatest  of  his  contemporaries  was  due 


48  WILLIAM  LAUD 

to  his  possession  of  qualities  which  naturally  and  rightly 
inspired  the  love  and  admiration  of  those  who  knew 
him.  He  was  a  warm-hearted,  generous  man,  who 
sinned  in  hot  blood,  but  repented  with  tears — "  good- 
hearted,"  as  men  say,  and  full  of  buoyant  youth  fulness. 
His  contemporaries,  with  all  their  adulation  of  his 
power  and  position,  yet  felt  for  him  always  as  sober 
men  feel  for  a  gallant  boy  called  upon  to  perform  great 
tasks.  They  were  tolerant  of  his  errors,  they  recog- 
nized his  difficulties,  they  watched  his  career  with 
sympathetic  interest  and  almost  involuntary  admiration. 

Such  as  these  were  the  feelings  with  which  Laud 
regarded  him.  They  first  came  together  on  religious 
questions.  April  23,  1622,  "the  King  sent  for  me," 
says  Laud's  Diary,  "and  set  me  into  a  course  about  the 
Countess  of  Buckingham,  who  about  that  time  was 
wavering  in  point  of  religion."  On  May  10  the  young 
Marquis  spoke  to  him  of  his  own  religious  difficulties, 
and  ten  days  later  Laud  gave  him  "  papers  concerning 
the  difference  between  the  Church  of  England  and 
Rome  in  point  of  salvation,  etc."  Buckingham  was 
present  at  the  conference  with  Fisher,  which  drew  him 
nearer  to  Laud  as  it  confirmed  him  in  the  English 
Church.  On  Whit  Sunday  they  had  intimate  talk 
together — "  the  particulars  are  not  for  paper." 1  On  the 
eve  of  Trinity  Sunday  the  favourite  made  his  confession 
to  the  Bishop,  and  next  day  he  received  the  Blessed 
Sacrament.  On  January  11  of  the  next  year  Laud's 
Diary  has — "  My  Lord  of  Buckingham  and  I  in  the 
inner  chamber  at  York  House.    Quod  beet  salvator 

NOSTER  CHRISTUS  JESUS." 

1  "June  15,  I  became  C.  to  my  Lord  of  Buckingham."  There 
can  be  no  doubt  this  means  confessor.  So  Heylin,  Gyp.  Aug.,  p. 
101.    Laud  practically  admitted  it  at  his  trial. 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


49 


From  that  time  they  became  close  friends.  It  does 
not  appear  that  Laud  knew  of  the  journey  into  Spain, 
kept  secret  as  far  as  possible,  till  his  friend  had  started 
on  the  foolish  venture.  Letters  passed  between  them 
during  his  absence,  and  when  he  returned  the  friend- 
ship was  knit  more  closely  than  ever,  and  Williams 
lost  all  favour  with  the  Duke.  From  that  time  till  his 
murder  Buckingham  and  Laud  grew  more  and  more 
near  together.  Laud  watched  with  him  all  night  when 
he  was  sick,1  stayed  with  him  in  the  country,  advised 
him  about  his  unhappy  brother,  Lord  Purbeck,2  talked 
to  him  of  all  matters,  from  witches  and  astrologers  to 
that  tragic  blot  on  his  own  life,  the  marriage  of  Lord 
Devon,  christened  his  children,  wrote  letters  and 
speeches  for  him  on  matters  of  Church  and  State,  and 
was,  as  he  styled  himself  in  writing,  his  "  most  devoted 
and  affectionate  friend."  It  was  a  feeling  not  uncommon 
in  the  age  in  which  he  lived ;  it  reminds  one  at  times 
of  Languet's  attachment  to  Sidney,  or  Michelangelo's  to 
Cavalieri.  And  of  his  wife,  too  much  neglected,  he 
writes  that  she  is  "  goodness  itself."  It  is  clear  that 
on  Laud's  side  the  aim  of  the  friendship  was  above  all 
things  religious.  He  looked  upon  the  fickle  Duke  as 
one  upon  whom,  more  especially  after  King  James's 
death,  the  fortunes  of  England  depended,  and  most  of 
all  the  fortunes  of  the  English  Church.  He  was  well- 
disposed  :  it  was  Laud's  determination  that  he  should 
be  also  well-informed.  Thus  he  supplied  him  with  the 
famous  list  of  clergy  for  preferment,  marked  with  the 
letters  0  and  P.  Thus  he  planned  with  him  Church 
endowments,  and  fortified  him  with  arguments  against 

1  Whit  Sunday,  1624,  and  Tuesday,  he  watched  all  night. 

2  Cal.  State  Papers,  1625-6,  p.  363  (June  1626). 

E 


50 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Rome  and  Geneva.  He  thought  of  him  sleeping  and 
waking.1  His  prayers  show  how  near  he  was  to  his 
heart.  "  Gracious  Father,  I  humbly  beseech  Thee,  bless 
the  Duke  of  Buckingham  with  all  spiritual  and  tem- 
poral blessings,  but  especially  spiritual.  Make  and 
continue  him  faithful  to  his  prince,  serviceable  to  his 
country,  devout  in  Thy  Truth  and  Church ;  a  most 
happy  husband  and  a  blessed  father ;  filled  with  the 
constant  love  and  honour  of  his  prince,  that  all  Thy 
blessings  may  flow  upon  himself  and  his  posterity  after 
him.  Continue  him  a  true-hearted  friend  to  me,  Thy 
poor  servant,  whom  Thou  hast  honoured  in  his  eyes. 
.  .  .  .  Even  so,  Lord,  and  make  him  continually  to 
serve  Thee."  Then  follow  other  prayers  to  the  same 
purport,  "much  used,"  as  Prynne  said,2  "as  is  evident 
by  the  fouling  of  the  leaves  with  his  fingers." 

Laud,  in  fact,  as  religious  men  of  mature  years  do 
so  naturally,  always  hoped  and  believed  the  best  of  his 
gallant  young  friend.  If  to  others  he  was  a  profligate, 
to  Laud  he  was  a  penitent.  Laud  cherished  his  best 
intentions,  and  believed,  perhaps  too  often,  that  they 
would  be  performed.  There  was  a  tenderness  indeed 
about  his  thoughts  of  the  favourite  which  added  a 
genuine  personal  affection  to  his  religious  care.  It  was 
a  friendship  which  death  and  danger  could  not  destroy. 
When  he  was  charged  at  his  trial,  years  after,  with 
correspondence  with  Buckingham,  he  boldly  answered, 
"  My  lord,  I  hold  it  my  great  honour  thac  my  lord  duke 
would  write  to  me  and  give  me  leave  to  write  to  him." 

Of  a  different  fashion  and  a  different  origin  was  his 

1  Diary,  Aug.  21,  1625,  Works,  hi.  170.  "Ea  nocte  in  somnis 
visus  est  mihi  Dux  Buckinghanriae  in  lectum  meum  ascendere  ; 
nbi  multo  erga  me  amore  se  gessit." 

2  Breviate,  p.  13. 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


51 


friendship  with  Strafford.  But  it  is  probable  that  here 
also  the  beginning  of  the  friendship  was  religion.  The 
first  entry  in  Land's  Diary  relating  to  Went  worth,  Jan. 
21,  1G30-31,  is  in  terms  similar  to  those  used  when 
Buckingham's  confession  is  referred  to.  These  two 
minds,  whose  religious  belief  and  theories  of  govern- 
ment agreed,  came  naturally  together.  In  method  as 
well  as  thought  their  views  were  akin.  What  they  boldly 
decided  on  they  would  bravely  execute.  They  were  not 
satisfied  with  smooth  semblances :  their  ideal  was 
"  thoroughness  "  in  action  as  in  thought  and  life.  Straf- 
ford, in  fact,  answered  more  nearly  than  any  one  else  to 
the  want,  which  even  the  self-contained  Churchman  felt, 
of  a  helpmeet  in  his  deepest  projects.  "  I  am  alone 
in  those  things  which  draw  not  private  profit  after 
them  " — so  he  said  pathetically.  Thus,  as  Mr.  Firth 
well  says, 1  "  the  intimacy  and  the  confidence  between 
the  two  men  rose  naturally  from  their  characters  and 
position.  Each  had  an  unselfish  devotion  to  the  monarch 
lie  served,  and  to  the  ideas  which  he  hoped  to  realize 
through  the  monarchy."  When  Wentworth  was  in 
Ireland  the  friends  wrote  constantly  and  intimately. 
Laud  was  the  confidant  of  all  the  Deputy's  political 
schemes,  and  the  religious  policy  belonged  to  both 
alike.  Strafford  sent  Laud  duplicates  of  all  his  im- 
portant despatches.  Laud  told  Strafford  of  all  his 
petty  worries,  as  well  as  his  great  checks.  Both  chafed 
against  "  my  lady  Mora,"  and  beat  themselves  in  vain 
against  the  sluggish  indolence  of  self-seeking  courtiers. 
"  Private  ends,"  wrote  Laud,  "  are  such  blocks  in  the 
public  way,  and  lie  so  thick,  that  you  may  promise 

1  Introduction  to  Robert  Browning's  prose  life  of  Strafford, 
p.  lxvi. 


52 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


what  you  will,  and  I  must  perforin  what  I  can  and  no 
more." 

The  mass  of  letters  preserved  is  very  great ;  Laud 
wrote  more  frequently  to  Strafford  than  to  any  other 
man.  The  letters  touch  not  only  public  affairs, — the 
agreement  of  the  two  men  being  complete  on  all 
matters  of  policy,  and  the  smallest  details  being  dis- 
cussed between  them, — but  also  the  private  matters  of 
the  writers.  The  tone  throughout  is  that  of  old  friends, 
joking  at  each  other's  expense,  grateful  for  remem- 
brances, humouring  each  other's  whims,  and  devoted  to 
each  other's  interests,  but  chiefly  to  those  views  of 
national  policy  they  had  at  heart. 

Much  of  the  correspondence  on  both  sides  was  in 
cipher,  and  much  of  it  was  of  a  very  private  nature, 
revealing  the  distrust  which  both  writers  felt  concerning 
the  Queen's  influence,  Cottington,  and  others  of  the 
Court.  Laud  was  not  without  fear  of  the  discovery  of 
the  key.  "The  cipher1  between  us  both  you  and  I 
have.  By  that  cipher  all  our  letters  may  be  read  when 
we  are  dead.  Some  things  you  know  are  personal,  and 
such  as,  though  not  hurtful,  yet  such  as  neither  of  us 
would  have  some  men  see." 

From  the  time  that  the  storm  burst,  and  Strafford 
returned  from  Ireland  to  lead  the  King's  force  against 
the  Scots,  the  correspondence  ceased — or  the  letters 
have  been  destroyed.  But  the  Diary,  which  has  hitherto 
been  silent  about  Wentworth  since  its  first  mention  of 
him,  adds  a  few  details  of  the  last  years  of  the  states- 
man. It  records  that  they  both  advised  the  King,  on 
December  27,  1639,  to  summon  a  Parliament :  the 
impeachment  and  the  trial  too  find  place. 

1  Works,  vii.  166. 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


53 


The  "  History  of  the  Troubles "  also  adds  some 
significant  touches,  and  gives  a  fuller  account  of  Straf- 
ford's trial,  ending  with  a  comment  on  Charles's  pitiful 
cowardice,  bitter  indeed  in  its  brevity.  "  It  had  been 
far  more  regal  to  reject  the  Bill  when  it  had  been 
brought  to  him  (his  conscience  standing  so  as  his 
Majesty  openly  professed  it  did)  than  to  make  this 
honourable  preface,  and  let  the  Bill  pass  after."  1 

The  last  meeting  of  the  two  friends  is  too  famous  to 
need  telling  again.  The  old  prisoner  fainting  at  the 
last  sight  of  his  staunch  colleague,  yet  rising  again  to 
proclaim  the  condemned  traitor  "more  serviceable  to 
the  Church  (he  would  not  mention  the  State)  than 
either  himself  or  any  of  all  the  Churchmen  had  ever 
been  " — it  is  a  picture  perhaps  the  most  pathetic  that 
all  those  days  of  fears  and  fightings  have  left  us. 

"  Thus  ended,"  wrote  Laud,  "  the  wisest,  the  stoutest, 
and  every  way  the  ablest  subject  that  this  nation  hath 
bred  this  many  years.  The  only  imperfections  which 
he  had,  that  were  known  to  me,  were  his  want  of  bodily 
health,  and  a  carelessness,  or  rather  roughness,  not  to 
oblige  any ;  and  his  mishaps  in  this  last  action  were 
that  he  groaned  under  the  public  envy  of  the  nobles, 
served  a  mild  and  a  gracious  prince,  who  knew  not  how 
to  be  or  be  made  great ;  and  trusted  false,  perfidious, 
and  cowardly  men  in  the  northern  employment,  though 
he  had  many  doubts  put  to  him  about  it.  The  day 
was  after  called  by  divers,  Homicidium  Comitis 
Straffordiae,  '  the  day  of  the  murder  of  Strafford ' ; 
because,  when  malice  itself  could  find  no  law  to  put 
him  to  death,  they  made  a  law  of  purpose  for  it.  God 
forgive  all,  and  be  merciful."  2  It  is  the  last  touching 
1  Laud's  Works,  iii.  441.  2  Ibid.,  441. 


54 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


word  on  the  long  friendship.  If  Laud  loved  no  one  so 
deeply  as  he  loved  Buckingham,  he  had  no  friend  so 
true  as  Strafford. 

It  is  the  common  fate  of  men  immersed  in  busi- 
ness of  Church  or  State,  and  not  least  of  celibate 
ecclesiastics,  and  of  those  whose  hearts  are  generous, 
to  find  among  the  many  to  whom  they  are  related 
by  ties  of  business,  or  generosity,  or  sympathy, 
scarce  one  sharer  of  the  intimacies  of  the  heart. 
Among  the  many  who  surrounded  Laud,  whom  he 
met  daily,  and  whom  he  benefited,  there  is  scarce 
one  besides  Buckingham  and  Strafford  who  fills  any 
place  in  his  inner  life.  Windebanke  was  almost  a 
creature  of  his  hand,  and  for  some  years  they  were 
intimate.  Laud  stayed  often  at  Haines  Hill,  and 
Windebanke  professed  to  follow  the  Archbishop's  lead  in 
politics.  But  the  friendship  was  broken  ;  Windebanke 
proved  self-seeking  like  the  rest.  Juxon,  his  successor 
as  President  of  S.  John's,  raised  by  his  influence  to  be 
Treasurer  and  Bishop  of  London,  Laud  loved  and 
trusted.  He  had  known  him  from  his  childhood,  and 
they  had  worked  together  in  college  matters,  where 
Juxon  developed  his  extraordinary  capacity  for  hard 
work  and  his  keen  business  judgment.  When  Laud 
left  the  University  Juxon  was  his  Oxford  correspondent, 
constantly  writing  him  chatty  letters  of  University  doings 
and  prophecies  of  preferment,  so  that  he  might  see,  he 
says,  "  the  good  opinion  we  have  of  ourselves  at  Oxford." 
He  aided  him  too  in  the  reconciliation  of  Chillingworth 
to  the  English  Church,  with  the  help  of  Sheldon,  then 
Fellow  of  All  Souls,  eventually  the  successor  of  Laud 
and  Juxon  as  Primate.  As  Bishop  of  London  and  as 
Lord  Treasurer  Juxon  became  Laud's  right  hand.  The 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


55 


hardest  of  workers,  the  kindest  of  men — "  that  good 
man,"  as  Charles  loved  to  call  him — he  was  one  of  the 
few  in  that  time  of  strife  of  whom  it  may  be  said  that 
they  made  no  enemies.  "  Neither  as  bishop  nor 
treasurer,"  says  Sir  Philip  Warwick,  who  had  been  his 
secretary,  "  came  there  any  one  accusation  against  him 
in  that  last  parliament,  whose  ears  were  opened,  nay 
itching,  after  such  complaints,"  and  Falkland,  in  an 
attack  on  the  bishops,  made  an  exception  in  his  favour, 
"  that  in  an  unexpected  place  and  power  he  expressed 
an  equal  moderation  and  humility,  being  neither  am- 
bitious before,  nor  proud  after,  either  the  crozier  or  the 
white  staff." 

William  Cavendish,  the  gallant  Marquis  of  Newcastle, 
was  another  friend  of  Laud,  as  he  was  a  friend  also  of 
Strafford.  He  was  a  man  upon  whose  honour  they  felt 
they  could  rely.  Laud  rejoiced  at  his  appointment  as 
governor  to  the  young  Prince  of  Wales.  In  his  will  he 
left  him  his  "best  diamond  ring,  worth  £140,  or  near 
it."    Noy,  too,  was  his  "dear  friend." 

Among  those  with  whom  he  was  intimate  must 
certainly  be  reckoned  many  of  his  chaplains,  and  not 
least  Dr.  Peter  Heylin,  his  enthusiastic  biographer.  It 
speaks  well  for  the  simplicity  and  genuineness  of 
Laud's  character  that  he  was  so  much  of  a  hero  to 
those  who  were  most  near  to  him. 

Beyond  this  we  find  scant  record  of  his  friends. 
Those  mysterious  initials  in  his  Diary  may  conceal 
intimacies  of  which  the  world  knows  nothing.  Prynne 
did  not  hesitate  to  suggest  criminal  relations,  to  which 
Laud's  whole  character  is  the  best  refutation.  Some 
of  them  at  least,  it  is  clear,  involved  hours  of  spiritual 
conflict.    It  is  not  probable  that  any  explanation  of 


56 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


them  will  ever  be  discovered.1  Some  may  have  covered 
deep  and  tender  friendships,  but  most  of  them  are 
probably  records  of  private  generosity  to  poor  men 
which  was  ill  repaid.  Certainly  people  of  all  classes 
when  in  distress  turned  naturally  to  Laud  to  help 
them.  Anne,  Countess  of  Pembroke,  when  her  husband 
treated  her  badly,  hoped  for  Laud's  mediation  to  obtain 
some  relaxation  of  the  severity  with  which  he  used 
her.2  Many  poor  petitioners  looked  to  him  to  help 
them  in  their  need. 

To  his  own  dependents  Laud  was  a  generous  master 
and  friend.  His  will  shows  how  great  was  his  regard 
for  those  who  had  served  him.  His  Diary  has  touching 
references  to  his  love  for  his  old  retainers.  Chiefest  of 
these  was  Adam  Torless,  his  steward,  who  managed  his 
household  at  Lambeth,  and  in  whose  hands  were  the 

1  The  matter  may  be  worth  further  investigation.  It  is  difficult, 
if  not  impossible,  to  trace  any  connection  between  the  persons  to 
whom  the  initials  may  refer,  and  any  particular  places  or  periods 
in  Land's  history.  E.  B.  and  L.  B.  and  R.  B.  are  almost  certainly 
related,  and  had  probably  some  connection  with  Stony  Stratford. 
E.  B.  was  a  man  very  intimate  with  Laud.  There  is  much  in  the 
Diary  which  looks  like  the  record  of  a  close  friendship.  "  Cum 
E.  B.,  July  28, 1617,  primo,"  in  the  Diary  is  to  be  read  in  connection 
with  a  prayer  for  pardon  in  the  Anniversary  Devotions,  "as  I  was 
returning  instead  of  thankfulness,  I  wandered  out  of  my  way 
from  Thee,  into  a  foul  and  strange  path."  The  references  to 
E.  B.  are  very  numerous.  "On  June  15,  1623,  R.  B.  died  at 
Stony  Stratford,  which  what  it  will  work  with  B.  E.,  God  in 
heaven  knoweth  and  be  merciful  unto  me."  Unfortunately  the 
Stony  Stratford  registers  for  1623  are  defective.  E.  B.  (who  was 
seemingly  the  same  as  B.  E.)  married  May  1,  1624.  There  is  no 
record  of  the  marriage  at  Stony  Stratford.  On  January  17,  1621, 
L.  B.  died.  The  Stony  Stratford  register  on  that  day  gives 
Widow  Beste's  burial.  The  name  Baylie  occurs  in  the  Stony 
Stratford  register  about  this  date.  It  is  possible  that  the  persons 
referred  to  may  have  been  relations  of  Dr.  R.  Baylie,  Laud's 
protege.    But  the  difficulties  are,  I  fear,  insoluble. 

2  Gal.  State  Papers,  Dom.,  November  3,  1635. 


PRIVATE  LIFE  AND  FRIENDS 


57 


arrangements  for  the  great  entertainment  which  he 
gave  to  the  King  and  the  University  at  Oxford  in  1636. 
In  1624  Laud  mentions  his  illness.  "  Saturday,  October  2, 
in  the  evening,  at  Mr.  Windebank's,  my  ancient  servant, 
Adam  Torless,  fell  into  a  swoon,  and  we  had  much  ado 
to  recover  him;  but,  I  thank  God,  we  did."  The 
record  of  his  death  is  full  of  genuine  feeling.  "  Thursday, 
September  23,  1641,  Mr.  Adam  Torless,  my  ancient, 
loving,  and  faithful  servant,  and  then  my  steward,  after 
he  had  served  me  full  forty  and  two  years,  died,  to  my 
great  both  loss  and  grief.  For  all  my  accounts  since 
my  commitment  were  in  his  hands,  and  had  he  not 
been  a  very  honest  and  careful  man,  I  must  have 
suffered  much  more  than  I  did ;  yet  I  suffered  enough, 
besides  the  loss  of  his  person,  who  was  now  become 
almost  the  only  comfort  of  my  affliction  and  my  age." 
William  Pennell,  another  servant,  he  dreamed  of  when 
he  lay  dying,  and  then  visited  him,  and  commended  his 
soul  to  God.  Many  other  servants  are  mentioned  by 
name,  always  with  some  kindly  word  of  remembrance. 
By  the  poor  of  Lambeth,  at  least,  he  was  beloved  ;  and  it 
seems,  indeed,  that  wherever  he  was  intimately  known, 
especially  by  the  humbler  classes,  bis  sturdy  honesty 
of  soul,  as  well  as  his  munificence,  made  his  character 
respected  and  admired. 

The  picture  that  we  glean  of  Laud  from  what  we  learn 
of  his  tastes  and  his  friendships  is  an  eminently  human 
and  pleasant  one.  He  was  clearly  a  man  utterly  without 
affectation,  warm-hearted  if  hot-tempered,  with  no  talent 
for  disguise  or  diplomacy,  a  solid  worker  and  a  stalwart 
champion  of  what  he  believed  to  be  right.  His  personal 
character  goes  some  way  to  explain  the  permanent  in- 
fluence which  he  exercised  upon  the  English  Church. 


CHAPTER  III. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH. 

On  August  12, 1G33,  the  congt  d'elire  was  issued  with 
the  letter  of  nomination  to  the  chapter  of  Canterbury. 
On  September  19  Laud  recorded  iu  his  Diary  the 
completion  of  the  translation.  He  was  now  in  a 
position  to  carry  out  more  fully  the  designs  for  the 
peace  and  reformation  of  the  Church  which  he  had 
long  entertained  and  had  already  in  some  cases 
inaugurated. 

To  stand  in  the  old  paths  was  the  closest  wish  of  his 
heart,  and  to  him  those  paths  seemed  clearly  to  be 
paths  of  peace.  Constantly  though  he  appeared  before 
the  world  as  a  militant  ecclesiastic,  he  was  always  in 
his  mind  suggesting  articles  of  peace.  Already  he  had 
endeavoured  to  win  men  to  agreement,  or  at  least  to 
abstinence  from  war,  by  a  formal  declaration  of  the 
position  which  he  had  claimed  for  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land in  his  controversy  with  Fisher.  "  The  Church 
does  not  require  assent  unto  particulars."  This  prin- 
ciple underlay  his  appeal  for  unity  at  the  opening  of 
Parliament  in  1626  :  this  was  the  basis  of  the  proclam- 
ation for  the  peace  of  the  Church  which  the  King 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


59 


issued  on  June  16  in  the  same  year.  It  was  his 
constant  thesis ;  and  it  was  embodied  in  the  Declar- 
ation which  Charles,  undoubtedly  on  his  advice,  issued 
in  November  1628,  and  which  was  intended  to  secure 
at  least  outward  peace,  by  enjoining  silence  in  the 
pulpits  on  those  points  on  which  men  never  had  been, 
and  never  will  be,  agreed,  but  over  which  inflamed  par- 
tisanship at  the  time  so  much  delighted  to  wrangle. 

"  For  the  present,  though  some  differences  have  been 
ill  raised,  yet  we  take  comfort  in  this,  that  all  clergy- 
men within  our  realm  have  always  most  willingly  sub- 
scribed to  the  Articles  established,  which  is  an  argu- 
ment that  they  all  agree  in  the  true,  usual,  literal 
meaning  of  the  said  Articles;  and  that  even  in  those 
curious  points  in  which  the  present  differences  lie,  men 
of  all  sorts  take  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England 
to  be  for  them ;  which  is  an  argument  again,  that  none 
of  them  intend  any  desertion  of  the  Articles  established. 
That  therefore  in  these  both  curious  and  unhappy 
differences,  which  have  for  so  many  hundred  years, 
in  different  times  and  places,  exercised  the  Church  of 
Christ,  we  will  that  all  further  curious  search  be  laid 
aside,  and  these  disputes  shut  up  in  God's  promises 
as  they  be  generally  set  forth  to  us  in  the  Ho1}7  Scrip- 
tures, and  the  general  meaning  of  the  Articles  of  the 
Church  of  England  according  to  them.  And  that  no 
man  hereafter  shall  either  print,  or  preach,  to  draw  the 
Article  aside  any  way,  but  shall  submit  to  it  in  the 
plain  and  full  meaning  thereof:  and  shall  not  put 
his  own  sense  or  comment  to  be  the  meaning  of  the 
Article,  but  shall  take  it  in  the  literal  and  grammatical 
sense." 

The  whole  passage  is  eminently  characteristic  of 


60 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Laud's  mind,  as  it  is  in  parts  of  his  style.  The  Declara- 
tion still  holds  its  place  in  our  prayer-books.  It  has 
certainly  not  prevented  controversy  on  the  Articles.  It 
may,  however,  be  said  that  the  principle  enunciated  in 
the  first  paragraph,  that  the  agreement  of  clergy  of 
different  schools  of  thought  to  the  general  sense  of  the 
Articles  is  a  proof  of  the  loyalty  of  each  party  to  the 
general  tenets  of  the  Church,  has  been  very  generally 
adopted,  and  has  been  a  material  safeguard  to  the 
Church.  The  aim  of  the  Declaration  was  unquestionably 
for  peace ;  and  the  Catholicism  of  the  Church  was  in 
no  way  affected  by  it.  The  strained  constructions  put 
upon  the  Articles  at  that  time  came  from  other  quarters. 
The  origin  of  the  phraseology,  which  afterwards  ap- 
peared questionable,  was  then  too  well  known  for  the 
language  to  cause  uneasiness  to  men  of  Laud's  opinions. 

The  Declaration  stands  almost  alone  among  the 
documents  of  the  time  as  a  genuine  effort  towards 
comprehension.  And  Laud  was  almost  alone  among 
the  leaders  of  religion  in  his  day  in  the  endeavour  to 
put  its  principles  into  practice.  The  widening  of  the 
English  Church,  without  any  abatement  of  its  Catholic 
claims,  had  been  one  of  the  many  projects  of  James  I. 
In  two  famous  instances  his  desires  had  seemed  to 
be  working  towards  fulfilment.  The  English  Church 
gave  shelter  to  Isaac  Casaubon  and  Marc  Antony  de 
Dominis.  The  former  had  found  in  the  Anglican 
theory,  and  in  the  practice  of  the  Church  as  he  knew 
it,  the  nearest  approach  to  what  seemed  to  him  to  be 
the  Apostolic  ideal.  James  had  welcomed  the  greatest 
scholar  in  Europe  with  enthusiasm.  Though  a  layman, 
he  received  prebends  at  Westminster  and  Canterbury, 
and  he  died  in  the  communion  of  the  English  Church, 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


(il 


and  was  buried  in  Westminster  Abbey.  It  was  a 
triumph  for  the  English  Church  to  have  enlisted  the 
support  of  one  whose  name  commanded  respect  through- 
out Europe.  What  James  had  done  for  Casaubon,  Laud 
desired  to  do  for  Vossius ;  and  he  also  received  a  pre- 
bend at  Canterbury.  Casaubon  was  an  example  of  how 
theological  learning,  out  of  harmony  with  Protestantism, 
could  find  a  meet  home  in  the  English  Church.  The 
Archbishop  of  Spalatro  appeared  to  show  that  the  real 
unity  of  Catholic  Christendom,  in  spite  of  the  English 
Reformation,  was  an  idea  not  unfamiliar  to  the  Roman 
theologians.  The  opinions  of  De  Dominis,  avaricious 
and  unstable  though  he  was,  had  just  the  character- 
istics which  appealed  to  James's  mind ;  and  his  book, 
De  Bepublicd  Ecclcsiasticd,  translated  into  ten  languages, 
might  have  proved  a  valuable  assistance  towards  reunion. 
But  the  defects  of  his  personal  character,1  and  the  almost 
comical  retribution  with  which  his  career  ended,  served 
to  destroy  any  hopes  that  might  have  been  formed  from 
the  public  statement  of  his  opinions.  The  careers  of 
Casaubon  and  De  Dominis  proved  of  no  real  advantage 
to  the  aim  of  a  more  general  and  Catholic  comprehen- 
sion. With  such  failures  before  him,  Laud  had  to  be 
content  with  endeavours  after  comprehension  in  the 
British  Isles.  Such  was  his  aim  in  Ireland,  where  he 
sought  to  win  the  Romanists  by  a  relaxation  of  the 
recusancy  fines  and  the  teaching  of  Catholic  doctrine. 
In  England  his  measures  looked  the  same  way. 

The  most  famous  instance  of  the  width  of  his  sympa- 

_  1  Mountague  called  him  "  that  infamous  Ecebolius  of  these 
times,  religionis  desnetor  ....  a  man,  if  any  other  of  his  coat 
and  calling,  apt  enough  to  he  circumcised  and  deny  Christ,  if  the 
Grand  Signior  would  but  make  him  chief  Muftie"  (Immediate 
Address  unto  God  alone). 


(j-2 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


thies — an  instance  sufficient  in  itself  to  absolve  him 
for  ever  from  the  charge  of  narrowness  and  bigotry — is 
his  action  towards  the  "  ever-memorable  John  Hales." 
It  might  have  been  thought  that  the  opinions  of  a  man 
so  much  beloved  would  have  great  influence,  and  that 
Laud  would  be  jealous  of  views  so  liberal.  It  appears 
that  nothing  is  further  from  the  truth.  Hales  believed 
"  that  pride  and  passion,  more  than  conscience,  were 
the  cause  of  all  separation  from  each  other's  commu- 
nion :  and  he  frequently  said  that  that  only  kept  the 
world  from  agreeing  upon  such  a  Liturgy  as  might  bring 
them  into  one  communion ;  all  doctrinal  points  upon 
which  men  differed  in  their  opinions  being  to  have 
no  place  in  any  Liturgy."  His  little  tract  on  Schism 
came  into  the  Archbishop's  hands,  "who,"  continues 
Clarendon,  "  was  a  very  rigid  surveyor  of  all  things 
which  never  so  little  bordered  upon  schism ;  and 
thought  the  Church  could  not  be  too  vigilant  against 
and  jealous  of  such  incursions."  The  conclusion  of  the 
story  is  as  honourable  to  Laud  as  to  Hales.  The  Arch- 
bishop sent  for  the  scholar  to  Lambeth :  they  talked 
in  the  garden  almost  all  day,  and  when  they  came  in 
they  were  "  high-coloured  and  almost  panting  for  want 
of  breath,  enough  to  show  that  there  had  been  some 
heats  between  them,  not  then  fully  cooled."  Laud  had 
said  "  that  the  time  was  very  apt  to  set  new  doctrines 
on  foot,  of  which  the  wits  of  the  age  were  too  suscep- 
tible ;  and  that  there  could  not  be  too  much  care  taken 
to  preserve  the  peace  and  unity  of  the  Church."  Shortly 
afterwards  he  sent  for  Hales  again,  "  when  there  was  a 
prebendary  of  Windsor  fallen,  and  told  him  the  King 
had  given  him  the  preferment,  because  it  lay  so  con- 
venient to  his  Fellowship  of  Eton,  which  (though  indeed 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


63 


the  most  convenient  preferment  that  could  be  thought 
of  for  him)  the  Archbishop  could  not  without  great 
difficulty  persuade  him  to  accept,  and  he  did  accept  it 
rather  to  please  him  than  himself,  because  he  really 
believed  he  had  enough  before.  He  was  one  of  the 
least  men  in  the  kingdom,  and  one  of  the  greatest 
scholars  in  Europe." 

The  natural  corollary  to  Laud's  desire  for  compre- 
hension was  his  dislike  of  separation.  To  this  he 
clung  to  the  last,  and  in  his  answer  to  Lord  Saye  and 
Sele  he  defined  clearly  what  he  meant  by  the  term. 
"  He,  whoever  he  be,  that  will  not  communicate  in 
public  prayers  with  a  national  Church,  which  serves 
God  as  she  ought,  is  a  separatist." 1  Thus  he  placed 
the  Romanists  as  well  as  "Anabaptists,  Brownists, 
Separatists,  Familists,"  among  the  sects  which  "en- 
deavoured "  the  "  subversion  both  of  the  doctrine  and 
discipline  of  the  Church  of  England."  2  The  system 
of  the  Church  of  England,  as  he  found  it,  settled  in 
formularies  and  doctrines,  in  the  rule  of  belief  and  the 
rule  of  worship,  preserving  its  historic  links  with  the 
primitive  and  historic  Christianity,  but  laying  upon 
men's  consciences  no  weightier  burden  of  necessary 
belief  than  the  first  ages  had  required — this  it  was 
his  aim  to  preserve  as  it  was  his  duty  to  administer. 
Within  its  pale  he  would  include  those  who  could 
accept  its  formularies  in  their  most  liberal  interpreta- 
tion; but  he  would  preserve,  by  every  means  in  the 
power  of  State  or  Church,  its  heart  of  doctrine  and 
worship  from  the  attacks  of  those  who  felt  compelled 
to  stand  without  and  in  opposition. 


1  Works,  vi.  120. 


-  Ibid.,  v.  622.  Canons  of  1640. 


64 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


It  has  been  stated 1  that  Laud  was  above  all  things  a 
doctrinal  reformer.  It  is  true  that  the  banishment  of 
Calvinistic  teaching  from  the  English  pulpits  seemed 
to  him  a  matter  of  supreme  importance.  But  on  the 
other  hand,  he  was  certainly  not  consciously  an  in- 
novator. He  had  chapter  and  verse  for  everything  he 
did.  He  appealed  constantly  to  the  English  articles 
and  canons,  to  the  Prayer-Book  and  the  Bible.  Out- 
side these  and  the  patristic  authorities  he  had  no  wish 
to  stray,  certainly  no  wish  to  enforce  compliance.  He 
was  in  principle  a  conservative,  not  a  reformer,  though 
a  practical  reformation  was  the  result  of  many  of  his 
measures. 

He  started  upon  his  work  with  the  full  support  of 
the  Crown.  Erastian  he  was  not,  for  he  desired  that 
in  religion  the  State  should  serve  and  not  command 
the  Church.  But  the  distinction  in  principle  was  not 
easy  to  preserve  in  practice,  and  in  the  public  mind  the 
Archbishop's  functions  as  privy  councillor  and  prelate, 
in  the  Star  Chamber  and  on  the  bishop's  throne,  were 
very  naturally  confused.  Charles  and  Laud  worked 
hand  in  hand,  and  their  wiser  measures  suffered  from 
association  with  political  blunders. 

Already  something  had  been  done  by  the  State 
to  induce  the  conformity  which  Laud  desired.  In 
December  1629  the  King  had  sent  out  instructions 
to  the  bishops,  by  which  the  "lecturers"2  were  to  be 

1  As  by  Dr.  Mozley,  Essarjs,  i.  163. 

2  Mr.  Gardiner  very  happily  describes  the  position  of  the 
lecturers,  vol.  vii.  p.  131.  A  lecturer  "was  paid  by  a  corporation, 
or  by  individuals,  to  preach  and  to  do  nothing  more.  He  might 
remain  sitting  in  the  vestry,  if  he  chose,  till  the  service  was  at  an 
end,  when  he  could  come  out  to  ascend  the  pulpit,  and  to  shine 
forth  in  the  eyes  of  the  congregation  as  one  who  was  far  superior 
to  the  man  by  whom  the  printed  prayers  had  been  recited.  The 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


65 


strictly  restrained.  Controversial  topics  were  to  be 
rigidly  excluded  from  sermons,  the  afternoon  discourse 
was  to  be  catechetical  and  for  the  young,  and  no 
teacher  was  to  preach  unless  he  had  first  read  Divine 
Service  in  his  surplice.  The  bishops  were  to  make 
stricter  oversight  of  the  doings  of  the  lecturers,  and,  in 
accordance  with  the  canons  of  1604,  and  the  advice  of 
Hooker,  the  bishops  were  "to  suffer  none  but  noblemen 
and  men  qualified  by  law  to  have  a  chaplain  in  their 
house." 

It  was  an  honest  attempt  to  stop  wrangling,  and  it 
was  honestly  carried  out.  A  "  restraint  on  both  sides  " 
was  intended.1,  The  Council  suppressed  the  Calvinist 
Bishop  Davenant  as  Laud  suppressed  the  orthodox 
Master  of  Trinity,  Cambridge.  Silence,  it  was  hoped, 
might  bring  consent.  But  it  is  ill  trying  to  enforce 
silence  on  excited  theologians  by  the  secular  arm. 
Laud,  as  soon  as  he  became  Primate,  caused  the  injunc- 
tions to  be  re-issued.  It  was  ever  his  aim  to  abolish 
"  vagrant  ministers  and  trencher-chaplains." 

While  the  injunctions,  one  fruit  of  the  State  action 
on  behalf  of  the  Church,  were  touching  the  Puritan 
party  in  one  direction,  The  Book  of  Sports  was  arousing 
discontent  in  another.  The  old  English  custom  of 
employing  the  Sunday  in  recreation,  after  public  worship, 
had  never  been  abandoned ;  and  there  were  special 
Church  feasts  in  commemoration  of  particular  festivals 
and  in  aid  of  Church  work.2    Puritanism  from  the  first 

lecturers  were  to  be  found  chiefly  in  towns  where  there  was  a 
strong  Puritan  element  in  the  population,  and  they  were  them- 
selves Puritan  almost  to  a  man." 

1  So  Charles's  speech  in  answer  to  the  Remonstrance,  which 
was  written  by  Laud.    Works,  vi.  9. 

'l  See  Pierce's  letter,  Cant.  JDooine,  142-3. 

F 


66 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


had  desired  to  use  Sunday  strictly  as  the  Jewish 
Sabbath :  Fuller  humorously  describes  how  the  "  pre- 
cise keeping "  of  the  day  spread  among  the  religious. 
James  I.  had  sought  to  pacify  disputants  by  a  Declaration, 
which  was  afterwards  embodied  in  The  Booh  of  Sports. 
But  the  judges  had  disregarded  both  ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction  and  the  royal  order.  They  had  forbidden  all 
village  feasts  on  Sundays,  and  required  the  clergy,  under 
penalty,  to  publish  their  order  during  Divine  service. 
This  was  an  absolutely  unwarrantable  intrusion  into 
the  sphere  of  ecclesiastical  rule,  and  it  was  one  which 
neither  King  nor  Archbishop  were  likely  to  tolerate. 
Charles  issued  the  Declaration  of  Sports,  ordering  that 
the  people 

"  be  not  disturbed,  letted,  or  discouraged  from  any 
lawful  recreation,  such  as  dancing,  either  men  or  women, 
archery  for  men,  leaping,  vaulting  or  any  other  such 
harmless  recreation,  nor  for  having  of  May  games, 
Whitsun-ales,  and  morris-dances,  so  as  the  same  be  had 
in  due  and  convenient  time  without  impediment  or 
neglect  of  Divine  service." 

Chief-Justice  Richardson,  who  had  greatly  exceeded 
his  legal  power,  when  on  the  Western  Circuit,  by 
punishing  those  clergy  who  had  not  published  the  order 
condemning  such  games,  was  called  before  the  Council 
and  received  a  severe  reprimand.  It  may  well  be 
imagined  how  Laud,  whose  inclination  in  such  matters 
were  all  in  favour  of  freedom,  and  who  had  now  a  fine 
opportunity  to  avenge  the  intrusion  into  Church  juris- 
diction, would  rate  the  officious  lawyer.  "  He  had  been 
almost  choked  with  a  pair  of  lawn  sleeves,"  he  declared 
when  he  came  out.  But  it  was  King  and  Council,  it 
must  not  be  forgotten,  who  intervened,  not  Laud  or  the 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


67 


clergy.  Many  of  the  parish  priests  indeed  hesitated  to 
read  the  King's  declaration.  It  was  a  vain  attempt  to 
legislate  where  custom  and  public  feeling  were  too 
strong  for  the  State.  It  pledged  King  and  Archbishop 
against  a  narrow  Sabbatarianism.  But  it  increased  the 
animosity  which  was  rising  against  them  among  the 
bigoted  zealots  to  whom  all  recreation  was  unlawful. 

On  one  other  point  we  find  the  Crown  issuing  orders 
which  had  come  with  better  grace  from  the  Church. 
On  November  12,  1630,  the  Council  wrote  to  Laud 
that 1  "  the  King,  foreseeing  the  present  scarcity,  by 
a  late  proclamation,  required  that  there  should  be 
an  abstinence  from  flesh  on  Fridays,  and  no  suppers 
kept  on  fasting  nights  in  inns  and  victualling  houses. 
That  proclamation  contains  no  new  thing,  but  points 
directly  to  laws  in  force  for  keeping  of  fasting  days,  as 
in  2nd  and  3rd  Edward  VI.  cap.  19,  and  5th  and  6th  of 
the  same  king,  cap.  3,  and  certain  statutes  of  Queen 
Elizabeth.  The  King's  care  in  that  behalf  is  so  much 
contemned  in  inns  and  such-like  places,  as  seems  very 
strange  to  his  Majesty  and  this  Board  ;  for  reformation 
whereof  the  Council  have  given  instructions  to  the 
Mayor  of  London  and  the  Justices  of  the  Peace  of 
Westminster  and  the  nearest  counties,  and  it  is  his 
Majesty's  pleasure  that  the  ecclesiastical  court  shall 
take  effectual  order  that  the  offenders  be  punished  in 
the  manner  expressed  in  the  last-mentioned  statute  of 
Edward  VI." 

The  State  requiring  fasting,  for  economic  reasons, 
and  insisting  upon  the  Church  giving  its  sanction  to 
the  plan,  is  a  curious  illustration  of  the  confusion  of 
functions  which  is  the  most  prominent  characteristic  of 
1  Cal.  State  Papers,  Dom.,  1G29-31,  p.  379. 


G8 


WILLTAM  LAUD 


the  time.  Such  a  measure  was  certain  to  arouse  oppo- 
sition. The  Church  lost  much  more  than  it  gained  by 
the  patronizing  interference  of  the  State. 

Such  was  the  alliance  to  which  Laud  as  Primate 
became  one  of  the  partners.  It  was  no  creation  of  his 
or  the  Kino's.  Puritans  as  well  as  Churchmen  thought 
some  such  union  essential ;  and  both  suffered  from  the 
attempts  to  work  an  unworkable  theory. 

The  beginning  of  Laud's  primacy  showed  the  influence 
of  the  State  at  its  height.  On  the  day  when  the  forms 
of  his  translation  were  completed,  the  King  addressed 
a  letter  to  the  new  Primate,  giving  directions,  in  fashion 
familiar  enough  in  the  time  of  Elizabeth,  for  the  new 
Archbishop  to  follow.  The  chief  point  of  his  injunction 
was  the  very  necessary  restriction  of  ordination.  The 
good  of  religion,  dear  to  the  King's  heart,  impels  him 
to  require  the  Archbishop  and  bishops  to  strictly  obey 
the  canon  requiring  a  title  for  every  person  ordained, 
and  to  follow  in  such  matters  "  the  ancient  course  of  the 
Church  and  the  Canon  Law,  so  far  forth  as  that  law  is 
received  in  this  Church  of  England."  1  The  Crown  had 
no  thought  to  abandon  the  prerogative  which  Elizabeth 
had  exercised,  of  issuing  injunctions  and  directions,  of 
commanding  and  enforcing  by  royal  authority  what  a 
more  scrupulous  age  would  have  left  to  the  ecclesiastical 
power.  It  was  the  deep-rooted  idea  of  the  time.  Abroad 
it  was  shared  by  Catholic  and  Protestant,  by  Louis  XIV. 
and  the  Great  Elector.  At  home  the  Parliament  claimed 
still  more  clearly  than  the  Crown  to  interpret  the  union 
between  Church  and  State,  and  exercised  the  more 
widely,  as  the  King's  power  fell  into  abeyance,  the 
authority  of  the  Sovereign  Body  over  all  estates  of  the 
1  Cal.  State  Papers,  1633-4,  p.  212. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


69 


realm.  But  Erastian  though  the  temper  of  the  age 
was,  and  though  the  councillors  of  the  Stuart  kings 
clung  to  theories  of  State  supremacy  to  which  bishops 
like  Laud  did  not  yield,  Charles  did  not  consider  that 
the  claim  of  the  Crown  involved  any  diminution  of  the 
dignity  of  the  Primate.  Laud  was  specially  directed, 
at  his  translation,  "  to  use  all  such  ceremonies  and  offices, 
and  to  carry  himself  with  the  same  state  and  dignity, 
and  to  assume  such  privileges  and  pre-eminences  as 
his  predecessors  in  that  see  have  used  and  enjoyed 
heretofore."  1 

Assured  of  the  royal  support,  and  animated  by  a 
keen  desire  to  restore  the  Church  to  its  high  estate, 
Laud,  with  his  characteristic  preference  for  practical 
realities,  turned  at  once  to  the  restoration  of  order  and 
reverence  in  public  worship. 

"  No  one  thing,"  he  had  said  to  the  King  in  the 
"  Epistle  Dedicatory "  to  his  conference  with  Fisher,2 
"  hath  made  conscientious  men  more  wavering  in  their 
own  minds,  or  more  apt  and  easy  to  be  drawn  aside 
from  the  sincerity  of  religion  professed  in  the  Church 
of  England,  than  the  want  of  uniform  and  decent 
order  in  too  many  churches  of  the  kingdom;  and  the 
Romanists  have  been  apt  to  say,  the  houses  of  God 
could  not  be  suffered  to  lie  so  nastily,  as  in  some  places 
they  have  done,  were  the  true  worship  of  God  observed 
in  them,  or  did  the  people  think  that  such  it  were. 
It  is  true,  the  inward  worship  of  the  heart  is  the  great 
service  of  God,  and  no  service  acceptable  without  it; 
but  the  external  worship  of  God  in  His  Church  is  the 
great  witness  to  the  world,  that  our  heart  stands  right 

1  Cal.  State  Papers,  1633-4,  p.  204. 

2  Works,  ii.  xvi. 


70 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


in  that  service  of  God.  Take  this  away,  or  bring  it 
into  contempt,  and  what  light  is  there  left  '  to  shine 
before  men  that  they  may  see  our  devotion,  and  glorify 
our  Father  which  is  in  Heaven '  ?  And  ....  these 
thoughts  are  they,  and  no  other,  which  have  made  me 
labour  so  much  as  I  have  done  for  decency  and  an 
orderly  settlement  of  the  external  worship  of  God  in 
the  Church ;  for  of  that  which  is  inward  there  can 
be  no  witness  among  men  nor  no  example  for  men. 
Now,  no  external  action  in  the  world  can  be  uniform 
without  some  ceremonies ;  and  these  in  religion,  the 
ancienter  they  be  the  better,  so  they  may  fit  time  and 
place.  Too  many  overburden  the  service  of  God,  and 
too  few  leave  it  naked.  And  scarce  anything  hath  hurt 
religion  more  in  these  broken  times  than  an  opinion 
in  too  many  men,  that  because  Rome  hath  thrust  some 
unnecessary  and  many  superstitious  ceremonies  upon 
the  Church,  therefore  the  Reformation  must  have  none 
at  all ;  not  considering  there  while,  that  ceremonies  are 
the  hedge  that  fence  the  substance  of  religion  from  all 
the  indignities  which  profaneness  and  sacrilege  too 
commonly  put  upon  it.  And  a  great  weakness  it  is, 
not  to  see  the  strength  which  ceremonies — things  weak 
enough  in  themselves,  God  knows — add  even  to  religion 
itself." 

It  would  be  difficult  to  find  a  passage  which  more 
accurately  expresses  the  principles  by  which  Laud 
was  guided  in  his  action  with  regard  to  the  external 
order  of  the  Church,  or  more  conclusively  acquits  him 
from  the  charges  that  have  been  brought  against  him 
of  a  preference  of  the  material  to  the  spiritual  aspect 
of  religion.  "  The  inward  service  of  the  heart "  appealed 
as  closely  to  him  as  to  the  sternest  Puritan,  but  the 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


71 


clearness  of  bis  mind  and  his  practical  knowledge  of 
men  taught  him  not  to  ignore  the  casket  while  he 
cherished  the  treasure  which  it  preserved. 

There  is  no  ground  for  asserting  that  Laud  assumed 
"  that  the  human  mind  could  only  be  purified  by  sub- 
mission to  a  certain  external  order,"  1  or  that  he  advo- 
cated "  the  pursuit  of  peace  in  preference  to  the  pursuit 
of  truth."  2  Outward  observances,  "  things  weak  enough 
in  themselves,"  were  to  him  valuable  only  as  safeguards 
of  the  reverence  with  which  every  spiritual  mind  must 
regard  Divine  things,  and  as  evidences  of  that  holy 
awe  and  fear  of  the  Lord  which  is  the  beginning  of 
wisdom.  To  him  Crashaw's  lines  would  seem  to  mark 
tbe  difference  between  the  Puritan  and  the  Anglican 
conception  of  worship — 

"  One  stands  up  close  and  treads  on  high, 
Where  th'  other  dares  not  bend  his  eye. 
One  nearer  to  God's  altar  trod, 
The  other  to  the  altar's  God.'' 

To  him  spiritual  things  were  not  dim  imaginations 
but  abiding  realities,  and  the  ineffable  mysteries  of 
Divine  love  were  made  visible  to  the  eye  of  faith. 
Humbled  to  the  dust  by  sin,  and  praying  ever  with 
the  tears  of  a  penitent,  he  still  delighted  to  think  of 
the  glory  of  God,  and  to  adore  Him  in  all  the  dignity 
and  devotion  of  public  worship.  "  Power  and  honour 
are  in  His  sanctuary."  Laud  could  not  shake  off  the 
reverence  of  ages,  or  abandon  the  material  helps  in 

1  S.  It.  Gardiner,  Hist.  Engl.,  vii.  18. 
Ibid.,  p.  125.  Mr.  Gardiner  continues — "  There  was  in  his 
mind  no  dim  sense  of  the  spiritual  depths  of  life,  no  reaching 
forward  to  ineffable  mysteries  veiled  from  the  eye  of  flesh."  I 
think  Laud's  prayers  show  that  his  religion  so  permeated  his  life 
that  the  "  depths  "  were  no  longer  "  dim." 


72 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


which  the  Church  had  ever  sought  both  to  honour  and 
to  draw  nigh. 

How  far  was  the  reality  of  worship  in  his  day  from 
the  ideal  of  dignity  which  he  desired,  is  abundantly 
evident.  It  might  well  be  said  that  many  of  the 
churches  did  "  lie  nastily."  In  some  parts  of  England 
the  idea  of  reverence  seemed  altogether  to  have 
departed.  In  Bedfordshire,  for  instance,  it  was  charged 
against  the  churchwardens  of  Knotting,  that  in  1634-36 
fighting-cocks  were  brought  into  the  chancel,  and  a 
fight  held  before  the  altar,  "  in  the  presence  of  many 
persons  assembled  as  spectators  of  the  sport,  who  betted 
and  laid  wagers  and  performed  '  the  other  offices  ordin- 
arily used  by  cock-fighters.' "  It  was  stated  that  the 
minister  of  the  parish  was  himself  present.1  Instances 
of  irreverence  even  more  gross  may  be  found  in  the 
literature  of  the  time.  If  they  seem  incredible,  it  needs 
but  a  slight  acquaintance  with  the  customs  of  some 
Catholic  nations  at  the  present  day  to  show  that  in 
certain  states  of  society  such  irreverence  is  not  unusual. 

When  the  sense  of  decency  in  Divine  worship  was 
so  far  lost,  it  might  have  been  expected  that  even  the 
most  sacred  things  should  be  contemned.  The  altars, 
which  the  iconoclasm  of  Edward  VI.  would  have  made 
mere  "  oyster-boards,"  had  in  many  cases  been  removed 
from  the  chancels  and  placed  in  the  body  of  the  church, 
but  should,  according  to  the  injunctions  of  Elizabeth,  have 
been  replaced  "  in  the  place  where  the  altar  stood  .  .  . 
so  to  stand  saving  when  the  Communion  of  the  Sacra- 
ment is  to  be  distributed ;  at  which  time  the  same  shall 
be  so  placed  within  the  chancel,  as  whereby  the  minister 
may  be  more  conveniently  heard,  and  the  communicants 
1  Col.  titatc  Papers,  1637,  preface  (ecclxx.  no.  90). 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


73 


also  more  conveniently  and  in  more  number  com- 
municate with  the  said  minister."  Practical  difficulties, 
however,  interfered  with  the  constant  moving  of  the 
Holy  Table,  and  thus  in  some  churches  it  was  always 
left  in  the  middle  of  the  church,  while  in  others,  as  in 
the  royal  chapels  and  most  of  the  cathedrals,  it  was 
never  moved  from  the  east  end. 

Laud's  love  of  regularity  and  order,  if  nothing  else, 
would  have  urged  him  to  obtain  the  removal  of  the 
altar  to  a  permanent  position  at  the  east  end.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  assert  that  he,  was  actuated  by  the  belief 
in  the  doctrines  of  the  Real  Presence  and  the  Eucbaristic 
Sacrifice,  which  he,  like  Andrewes,  undoubtedly  held,  for 
he  was  well  aware  that  the  position  of  the  altar,  as  for 
instance  in  churches  of  the  basilican  type  at  Rome  and 
elsewhere,  did  not  affect  the  profession  of  any  Catholic 
doctrine.  But  practically  the  moving  of  the  altar,  and 
still  more  the  permanent  position  in  the  middle  of  the 
church  or  the  chancel,  tended  of  necessity  to  irreverence. 
In  crowded  churches  the  rough  rustics  laid  their  hats 
and  coats  on  it,  and  it  shared  in  the  general  neglect 
which  carelessness  and  a  false  idea  of  opposition  between 
spiritual  and  external  worship  had  engendered. 

Laud's  action  at  Gloucester,  when  he  permanently 
fixed  the  altar  at  the  east  end,  and  ordered  that  all 
the  officials  should  make  reverence  towards  it  as  they 
entered  and  left  the  church,  was  dictated  primarily  by 
the  desire  to  restore  a  spirit  of  reverence.  Uniformity 
and  an  obedience  to  Church  order  were  secondary  but 
almost  equally  important  motives.  The  canons  required 
that  all  should  receive  the  Holy  Sacrament  kneeling ; 
the  custom  of  royal  chapels  and  cathedrals  justified  the 
bowing  towards  the  altar  as  it  did  its  position  at  the 


74 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


east  end.  "  When  this  reverence  is  performed,"  said 
Laud  at  his  trial,  "  'tis  to  God  as  to  the  Creator,  and  so 
divine  ;  but  'tis  only  '  toward  '  not  '  to  '  the  altar." 

In  1627  the  questions  which  centred  round  the  altar 
had  come  into  debate  through  the  action  of  the  vicar  of 
Grantham,  who  placed  the  Holy  Table  at  the  east  end  of 
the  choir.  Williams,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  gave  his  decision 
that  it  should  be  removed  on  occasion,  according  to  the 
injunctions.  Himself  in  practice  an  indifferentist,  with  a 
fondness  for  pomp,  as  the  description  of  his  own  private 
chapel  shows,  he  was  in  doctrine  opposed  to  the  teaching 
of  Andrewes  and  Laud.  He  justified  his  order  by  a 
condemnation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharistic  Sacrifice. 
In  1633  the  question  again  became  prominent.  The 
precedent  set  by  Laud  at  Gloucester,  or,  to  speak  more 
strictly,  the  usage  of  the  royal  chapels  and  the  cathe- 
drals, had  been  generally  followed,  but  there  remained 
many  districts  in  which  uniformity  had  not  been 
obtained.  No  general  order  was  yet  issued  on  the 
subject,  but  when  occasion  arose  the  more  dignified 
position  was  required. 

The  church  of  S.  Gregory,  which  was  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  S.  Paul's,  had 
been  restored  at  the  cost  of  £2000.  The  dean  and 
chapter,  declaring  that  the  altar  had  been  irreverently 
used,  and  that  men  "had  not  been  ashamed  to  sit  on 
it,  others  to  write,  others  to  transact  there  other  and 
perhaps  viler  matter  of  business,  distinguishing  nothing 
or  little  between  the  Lord's  table  and  a  plain  or  con- 
vivial table,"  directed  that  it  should  in  future  be  placed 
altarwise  at  the  east  end.  Five  of  the  parishioners 
appealed  to  the  Court  of  Arches.  The  King  called  the 
suit  into  the  Privy  Council,  because  the  Dean  of  Arches 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


75 


was  known  to  be  prejudiced,  and  "certain  to  decide  in 
favour  of  the  complainants." 1  After  a  long  hearing" 
Charles  declared  that  the  decision  of  the  Ordinary  must 
be  obeyed.  He  pointed  out  that  the  objection  of  a  few 
parishioners,  if  allowed,  might  upset  any  settled  order. 

The  complainants  had  perhaps  wisely  grounded  their 
case  not  upon  Elizabeth's  injunctions,  the  ecclesiastical 
validity  of  which  was  questionable,  but  upon  a  liberty 
allowed  by  the  Prayer-Book  and  the  Eighty-second 
Canon.  The  question  arose,  to  whom  belonged  the 
liberty  ?  "  For  so  much,"  said  Charles,  "  as  concerns  the 
liberty  given  by  the  said  Common  Prayer-Book  or  canon, 
for  placing  the  Communion  table  in  any  church  or  chapel 
with  most  conveniency;  that  liberty  is  not  so  to  be 
understood  as  if  it  were  ever  left  to  the  discretion  of 
the  parish,  much  less  to  the  particular  fancy  of  any 
humorous  person,  but  to  the  judgment  of  the  Ordinary."  2 
Thus  the  dean  and  chapter,  as  ordinaries,  won  their 
case.  The  decision  was  an  obviously  reasonable  one. 
But  for  some  such  court  of  appeal  it  would  have  been 
impossible  to  preserve  churches  from  the  wilder- 
excesses  of  Congregationalism.  The  discretion  in  this, 
as  in  other  cases  already  provided,  could  best  rest  with 
the  Ordinary. 

At  the  same  time  as  this  decision,  in  a  case  referred 
to  him  from  Leicester,  Bishop  Williams  had  again  ordered 
that  the  altar  should  remain  at  the  east  wall  except 
when  used  for  the  participation  of  the  sacred  mysteries. 
His  order  did  not  in  theory  conflict  with  Charles's 
judgment.    In  each  case  the  ordinary  acted  as  a  court 

1  Gardiner,  Hid.  Engl.,  vii.  p.  310  ;  and  Cal,  State  Papers, 
October  18,  1633. 

2  The  act  of  the  Privy  Council  is  given  in  Gardiner,  Con- 
stitutional Documents,  pp.  35-37. 


76 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


of  appeal.  So  matters  remained  until  Laud  as  Primate 
undertook  a  metropolitical  visitation. 

Established  at  Canterbury,  with  the  full  support  of 
the  King,  Laud  determined  upon  a  great  effort  to  make 
the  English  Church  recognize  and  display  its  unity 
through  an  uniformity  of  worship  and  ceremonial,  which 
its  formularies  undoubtedly  contemplated,  and  which 
only  the  leavening  influence  of  foreign  Protestantism 
had  disturbed. 

Accordingly,  at  the  beginning  of  1634  he  instituted 
a  visitation  of  all  the  dioceses  of  his  province,  under- 
taken after  pre-Reformation  precedent,  in  right  of  his 
metropolitan  authority.  The  work  was  continued  in 
the  two  following  years,  and  was  placed  in  the  hands 
of  his  vicar-general,  Sir  Nathaniel  Brent,1  warden  of 
Merton  College,  Oxford,  and  afterwards  of  Sir  John 
Lambe,  Dean  of  Arches.  The  articles  for  the  visitation, 
says  Heylin,  "  had  in  them  little  more  than  ordinary," 
and  this  may  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  many  that 
are  preserved.  They  relate  chiefly  in  the  case  of 
cathedrals  to  the  requirements  of  the  capitular 
statutes,  and  in  the  case  of  parish  churches  to  the 
orders  of  the  Prayer-Book  and  canons.  "But  he  had 
given  directions,"  continues  Heylin,2  "  to  his  Vicar- 
General  to  inquire  into  the  observation  of  his  Majesty's 
instructions  of  the  year  1629,  to  command  the  said 
churchwardens  to  place  the  Communion  table  under  the 
eastern  wall  of  the  chancel,  where  formerly  the  altar 
stood ;  to  set  a  decent  rail  before  it  to  avoid  profane- 
ness ;  and  at  the  rails  the  communicants  to  receive  the 

1  It  appears  from  Heylin  that  at  one  time  it  was  intended  that 
lie  should  be  a  joint  commissioner,  but  afterwards  the  idea  was 
abandoned. — Cypr.  Anglic.,  p.  285.  1  Ibid. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


77 


Blessed  Sacrament."  It  was  this  general  order,  which 
needs  no  justification  at  the  present  day,  and  which  was 
then  urgently  required  in  the  interests  of  decency  and 
reverence,  the  enforcement  of  which  was  the  most 
permanent  result  of  the  visitation,  since  it  gave  the 
rule  which  has  ever  since  been  observed.  It  was  a 
definite  assertion  of  the  place  of  the  altar,  and  not  the 
pulpit,  as  the  centre  of  worship  in  the  English  Church. 
As  such  it  was  taken  by  the  Puritans,  as  such  resisted, 
and  as  such  charged  against  Laud  at  his  trial.  Nor  did 
he  ever  refuse  to  meet  his  opponents  on  this  ground. 
"  Mr.  Brown,1  in  his  summary  charge,  pressed  this 
against  me.  I  answered  as  before,  and  added  that  in 
all  ages  of  the  Church  the  touchstone  of  religion  was 
not  to  hear  the  word  preached  but  to  communicate. 
And  at  this  day  many  will  come  and  hear  sermons,  who 
yet  will  not  receive  the  Communion  together.  And  as  I 
call  the  Holy  Table  the  greatest  place  of  God's  residence 
on  earth,  so  doth  a  late  learned  divine  of  this  Church 
[Thorndike]  call  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist  '  the 
crown  of  public  service,  and  the  most  solemn  and  chief 
work  of  Christian  assemblies.' "  He  had  said,  and  he 
stood  to  it,  that  "  the  altar  is  the  greatest  place  of  God's 
residence  upon  earth,  greater  than  the  pulpit,  for  there 
'tis  Hoc  est  Coijms  Ileum,  this  is  My  Body ;  but  in  the 
other  it  is  at  most  but  Hoc  est  Verbum  Meum,  This  is 
My  Word ;  and  a  greater  reverence  is  due  to  the  Body, 
than  the  Word,  of  the  Lord." 

The  removal  of  the  altars  seems  to  have  been  carried 
out  during  the  visitation  without  much  opposition. 
There  were  occasional  protests,  but  on  the  whole  the 
change  was  peaceably  adopted.    The  parishioners  of 
1  Works,  iv.  284. 


78 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


All  Hallows,  Barking,1  petitioned  the  Archbishop  that 
the  Holy  Table  recently  removed  by  their  vicar  might 
be  restored  to  its  place.  The  churchwardens  of  Beck- 
ington  also  appealed  to  him  against  the  decision  of  the 
Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells.2  But  these  seem  to  have 
been  exceptional  cases.  However  strong  may  have 
been  the  feeling  of  Puritanism,  it  did  not  immediately 
betray  itself. 

The  work  of  the  visitation  was,  however,  by  no 
means  confined  to  the  regulation  of  the  position  of  the 
altars.  The  notes  written  by  Laud  for  the  instruction 
of  Sir  Nathaniel  Brent  cover  a  large  field  of  ecclesias- 
tical law  and  usage,  both  "  general "  and  "  particular." 
Schools  were  no  longer  to  be  kept  in  the  chancel  of  a 
church ;  fonts  were  to  be  restored  to  their  ancient  place ; 
chancels  "  severed  from  the  church  or  other  ways  pro- 
faned "  were  to  be  altered ;  strict  inquiry  was  to  be 
made  into  "  peculiars "  held  by  prebendaries  or  by  lay 
persons. 

In  the  parish  churches,  as  a  rule,  besides  the  removal, 
where  necessary,  of  the  altars,  no  changes  were  made, 
and  no  requirements  were  stated  beyond  those  of  an 
ordinary  episcopal  visitation.  In  the  cathedrals,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  demands  were  more  extensive.  The 
perennial  difficulty  of  episcopal  contest  over  capitular 
bodies  had  by  no  means  disappeared  at  the  Reforma- 
tion. The  statutes  by  which  the  chapters  were  bound 
were  very  frequently  evaded.  Laud  had  no  tolerance 
for  such  breach  of  rule.  As  Archbishop  and  visitor  he 
could  exercise  a  control  which  had  been  impossible  to 
the  bishops.    Of  the  minuteness  of  the  inquiries  which 

1  Cal.  State  Papers,  Bom.,  1637-8,  p.  67. 

2  Prynne,  Canterbt trie's  Doome,  p.  97. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


7!) 


his  metropolitical  visitation  involved,  and  of  the  curious 
answers  which  were  elicited,  the  records  of  the  Salisbury 
inquiry,  preserved  among  the  papers  of  the  House  of 
Lords,1  afford  a  characteristic  illustration.  The  questions 
start  from  the  ancient  obligations  of  the  cathedral 
officers — "  Whether  have  you  any  ancient  laws,  statutes, 
or  ordinances  ....  whereby  your  church  is  governed, 
and  who  is  accompted  to  be  first  author  or  founder  of 
them,  and  whether  have  they  been  altered  or  changed 
at  any  time  ? "  He  is  careful  to  assert  the  continuity 
of  the  obligations ;  there  is  indeed  no  reference  to  any 
Reformation  changes  in  the  articles  of  inquiry.  The 
statutory  residence,  the  duty  of  private  hospitality,  the 
preaching  of  sermons,  the  management  of  cathedral 
property,  especially  in  the  matter  of  leases,  the  minis- 
tration of  Sacraments,  the  teaching  and  training  of  the 
choir,  the  private  worthiness  of  the  ministers,  the 
attendance  at  the  daily  morning  and  evening  services — 
these  are  the  questions  which  were  pressed  by  Sir 
Nathaniel  Brent  upon  the  officials  of  each  degree.  The 
answers  reveal  a  curious  medley  of  personal  quarrels 
and  indifferent  performances  of  duty.  "  We  have  been 
defective,  but  we  will  amend,"  is  the  burden  of  many  a 
reply.  The  choristers  were  not  taught  as  they  should 
be,  nor  "  well  ordered  and  instructed  in  the  art  of 
singing."  Most  of  the  prebendaries  answer,  as  it  is 
still  the  custom  to  answer  all  official  questionings,  as 
briefly  as  may  be,  and  with  care  rather  to  conceal  than  to 
impart  information.  But  here  and  there  a  little  per- 
sonal spite  brings  one  prebendary  or  another  into  an 
angry  prolixity  which  throws  a  flood  of  light  on  the 
management  of  cathedrals  at  the  time  when  Laud  was 
]  Printed  in  Wiltshire  Notes  and  Queries,  nos.  1—3. 


80 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


determined  to  make  them  worthy  centres  and  represent- 
atives of  the  highest  worship.  Dr.  Seward's  household 
causes  scandal :  Mr.  Edward  Thornborough  "  spends  too 
much  for  his  ease  with  too  little  discretion " :  the 
"  vergerers  "  neglect  their  duties  :  "  our  book  of  ancient 
statutes  is  neither  punctually  observed  nor  indeed  ac- 
knowledged by  most  of  us  to  be  of  any  power.  Answer 
will  be  made,  we  are  sworn  to  customs  as  well  as 
statutes — and  customs  we  make  and  break  according  to 
our  ease  or  profit." 

Laud's  register  contains  many  other  examples  of 
minute  inquiry,  and  the  answers,  with  the  injunctions 
issued  in  consequence,  reveal  curious  cases  of  neglect  of 
duty.  At  Lincoln,  for  instance,  the  altar  was  "  not  very 
decent,"  and  the  rail  was  worse.  The  organs  were  "  old 
and  naught."  The  copes  and  vestments  had  been 
embezzled,  and  worse  irregularities  appeared  to  be  not 
uncommon.1 

The  defects  revealed  by  the  visitation  gave  occasion 
for  further  inquiry  and  correspondence  with  the  bishops 
and  chapters.  Thus  in  1635  we  find  Laud  writing  to 
the  Chapter  of  Wells  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Warde  and  his 
residence,  which  had  been  submitted  to  him  by  the 
King.2  Bishops  such  as  Mountague  welcomed  his 
interference,  and  frequently  solicited  his  aid  in  such 
matters  as  non-residence.  Mr.  Hickes  would  not  per- 
form his  canonical  duties  in  Chichester  Cathedral, 
wrote  Mountague,  but  sent  as  substitutes  "whom  he 
can  get,  sometime  good,  sometime  bad,  any  riff-raff, 
whom  he  can  light  upon,  shifters,  Nonconformists, 
curates,  young  boys,  Puritans,  as  the  whole  city  hath 

1  Cal.  State  Papers,  Dom.,  Sept.  9,  1634. 

2  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.  Report  X,  App.,  pt.  4,  p.  258. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


81 


often  spoken  against  it."  1  Some  years  before  he  had 
been  kept  informed  of  the  case  of  Peter  Smart,  Pre- 
bendary of  Durham,  who  had  protested  vigorously 
against  the  order  of  the  Cathedral  service,  and  the  use 
of  the  vestments  required  by  the  canons  of  1604,  and 
had  been  deprived  of  his  prebend.2  It  does  not  appear 
that  he  actively  interfered,  but  his  influence  was  known 
to  be  on  the  side  of  Cosin  the  Dean.  Such  changes  as 
were  carried  out  seemed  to  be  acceptable  to  the  people, 
for  Bishop  Howson,  writing  to  Laud  in  1G30,  declared 
that  the  people,  after  their  own  parochial  services  which 
were  early,  "  came  by  troops  to  the  cathedral." 3 

In  all  these  matters  it  does  not  appear  that  Laud 
advocated  any  extravagant  changes,  or  that  he  con- 
sciously wandered  beyond  the  orders  and  formularies  of 
the  Church.  The  charges  of  "  popery  "  which  were 
brought  against  him,  if  they  were  not  equally  applicable 
to  the  framers  of  the  Prayer-Book  and  canons,  fell 
within  very  narrow  limits.  The  use  of  his  private 
chapel,  his  manner  of  consecrating  a  church,  the  wearing 
of  the  ancient  vestments,  these  were  not  great  matters, 
and  in  one  of  them  at  least  he  had  direct  warrant. 
Indeed  he  did  not  even  go  so  far  as  the  Prayer-Book 
ordered,  for  his  "  ornaments  "  were  far  below  the  re- 
quirements of  the  second  year  of  King  Edward  VI. 
At  his  trial  he  was  charged  with  the  use  of  "  organs, 
candlesticks,  a  picture  of  a  history  at  the  back  of  the 
altar,  and  copes  at  communions  and  consecrations."  He 
replied,  "  First,  these  things  have  been  in  use  ever  since 

1  Mountague  to  Laud,  Jan.  16,  1632. 

2  Wentworth  applied  to  Laud  to  use  his  influence  to  obtain  the 
vacant  prebend  for  his  chaplain,  Dr.  Carr. — Gal.  Stale  Papers, 
JJom.,  Oct,  3,  1630. 

3  Gal.  State  Papers,  Dora.,  March  17,  1631. 

G 


82 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


the  Reformation.  And  secondly  ....  it  was  in  rny 
chapel  as  it  was  at  White-hall :  no  difference.  And 
it  is  not  to  be  thought,  that  Queen  Elizabeth  and  King 
James  would  have  endured  them  all  their  time  in  their 
own  chapel  had  they  been  introductions  for  Popery. 
And  for  copes,  they  are  allowed  at  times  of  communion 
by  the  canons  of  the  Church." 

The  use  of  his  own  chapel  again  seems  to  have  been 
extremely  simple,  for  his  accusers  could  only  charge 
him  with  having  painted  windows,  and  consecrating  the 
new  vessels  for  use  at  the  Eucharist,  and  with  allowing 
a  "  crucifix  "  in  the  glass  and  on  the  hangings.  Some- 
thing more  elaborate  appeared  in  the  ceremonial 
adopted  at  the  consecration  of  the  Church  of  S. 
Catherine  Cree.  Prynne  grotesquely  mocked  at  it  in 
Canterburies  Doome.1  There  was  the  singing  of  the 
24th  Psalm,  and  sundry  "  bowings,  duckings,  and  cring- 
ings," and  much  reverence  at  the  altar :  but  Laud  was 
able  to  answer  that  he  did  not  follow  the  "  '  Pontifical,' 
but  a  copy  of  learned  and  reverend  Bishop  Andre wes." 

All  these  things  in  the  light  of  modern  controversies 
may  seem  small  matters  to  warrant  a  capital  charge, 
and  indeed  as  we  read  the  records  of  the  time  we  may 
marvel  at  Laud's  moderation.  It  would  be  absurd  to 
use  against  him  the  angry  language  which  has  been 
showered  upon  modern  "  ritualists."  The  most  timid  of 
latitudinarians  has  in  these  days  gone  beyond  him. 
But  still,  however  absurd  their  objections  to  particular 
actions,  the  Puritans  were  right  in  recognizing  his  posi- 
tion as  one  of  irreconcilable  antagonism  to  their  own. 
The  battle-ground  changes  as  the  years  go  on,  but  the 
warfare  is  still  the  same.  Laud,  with  all  his  modera- 
1  P.  115  sgq. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


83 


tion,  was  firm  in  his  adherence  to  the  old  paths.  The 
position  of  the  altar,  the  surplice,  the  cope,  the  stated 
forms  of  prayer  which  the  ages  had  allowed,  were  links 
to  the  primitive  and  undivided  body.  The  orders  and 
formularies  of  his  own  Church  seemed,  at  the  worst, 
never  to  have  severed  Anglicanism  from  historic 
Christianity.  There  were  safeguards  too  as  well  as 
links,  and  to  these  he  clung  as  a  soldier  fallen  into 
an  ambush  of  his  foes. 

It  was  this  feeling,  romantic  and  emotional  as  well 
as  practical,  bringing  with  it  beautiful  memories,  and 
binding  the  ages  of  English  devotion  each  to  each  by 
natural  piety,  that  appealed  so  forcibly  to  contemporaries 
whose  lives  were  very  different  from  his  own.  Cosin's 
book  of  devotions,  designed  to  provide  the  English 
ladies  of  the  Court  with  as  near  a  companion  in  the 
religious  life  as  the  French  ladies  of  the  Queen  possessed, 
was,  we  may  almost  say,  compiled  under  Laud's  influence. 
Saints  and  ascetics  as  well  as  scholars  and  statesmen 
confided  to  him  their  hopes  and  their  designs. 

How  readily  the  best  devotion  then  nurtured  in 
England  looked  to  him  as  its  head  may  be  seen  by  the 
example  of  the  leader  of  the  revival  of  the  religious 
life  in  the  English  Church.  Nicholas  Ferrar,  who 
had  been  Fellow  of  Clare,  Cambridge,  a  prominent 
member  of  the  Council  of  the  Virginia  Company,  and 
active  among  the  popular  party  in  Parliament  when  he 
sat  for  Lymington,  had  settled  at  Little  Gidding,  and 
ordered  his  household  on  the  lines  of  a  home  of  pious 
seclusion.  When  he  determined  to  seek  Ordination — a 
desire  which  he  kept  secret  even  from  his  mother  and 
his  dearest  friends — it  was  to  Laud  that  he  applied,  and 
was  by  him  that  he  was  ordained  deacon  on  Trinity 


84 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Sunday,  1G25.  The  bouse  at  Little  Gidding,  with  its 
beautiful  asceticism  and  its  tender  simplicity,  its  life  of 
rule  and  of  devotion,  was  under  Laud's  sanction.  It 
was  by  him  when  he  was  Archbishop  that  John  Ferrar 
was  presented  to  the  King  when  he  bought  the  rich 
concordance  which  Charles  ever  after  read  daily.  Gid- 
ding, said  the  Archbishop,  should  be  called  no  longer 
Parva  but  Magna.  In  1G40  the  young  Nicholas  went 
to  Lambeth  with  his  father.  Laud  "  embraced  him 
very  lovingly,"  and  said  of  the  books  he  brought,  "  they 
were  jewels  for  princes."  The  account  which  John 
Ferrar  gives  of  his  interview  with  the  Archbishop,  and 
his  great  kindness  to  the  bright  boy,  is  a  beautiful 
picture  of  the  true  piety  and  gentleness  of  Laud's  nature. 
"  Nicholas  Ferrar  kneeling  down  took  the  Bishop  by  the 
hand  and  kissed  it.  He  took  him  up  in  his  arms  and 
laid  his  hand  on  his  cheek,  and  earnestly  besought  God 
Almighty  to  bless  him,  andrf  increase  all  grace  in  him, 
and  fit  him  every  day  more  and  more  for  an  instrument 
of  His  glory  here  upon  earth  and  a  saint  in  heaven, 
'  which,'  said  he,  '  is  the  only  happiness  that  can  be 
desired,  and  ought  to  be  our  chief  end  in  all  our  actions. 
God  bless  you  !  God  bless  you  !  I  have  told  your 
father  what  is  to  be  done  for  you  after  the  holidays. 
God  will  provide  for  you  better  than  your  father  can. 
God  bless  you  and  keep  you.'  So  they  parted  from  his 
Grace." 

A  Little  Gidding  book,  which  Laud  gave  to  his  old 
college,  is  still  one  of  the  choicest  treasures  of  S. 
John's. 

It  was  to  Laud  also  that  George  Herbert  owed  the 
final  direction  of  his  life.  His  influence  touched  the 
gallant  young  scholar  at  the  very  crisis  of  his  hesitation, 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


85 


when  he  was  doubting  whether  to  serve  the  King,  with 
every  prospect  of  the  highest  preferment,  or  to  accept 
the  offer  of  the  little  country  parish  of  Bemerton,  and 
give  his  life  to  God  and  the  poor.  Pembroke  told  Laud 
of  his  kinsman's  irresolution  ;  and  he,  says  Isaac  Walton, 
"did  the  next  day  so  convince  Mr.  Herbert  that  the 
refusal  of  it  was  a  sin,  that  a  tailor  was  sent  for  to  come 
speedily  from  Salisbury  to  Wilton,  to  take  measure  and 
make  him  canonical  clothes  against  next  day."  It  must 
never  be  forgotten  that  it  was  Laud's  influence  which 
gave  to  the  English  Church  the  work  of  George 
Herbert  and  of  Chillingworth,  while  it  ratified  the  very 
different  services  of  John  Hales  and  Nicholas  Ferrar. 

But  Laud's  services  to  the  Church  were  material  as 
well  as  spiritual.  It  was  his  aim  to  make  the  clergy  the 
equals  of  the  gentry  to  whom  it  was  their  duty  to 
minister.  The  "lecturers,"  who  lived  upon  benefactions 
which  inevitably  tended  to  make  them  the  preachers  of 
doctrines  insisted  upon  by  their  patrons,  and  those 
generally  of  a  particular  school,  the  domestic  chap- 
lains whose  position  was  too  often  a  disgrace  to 
themselves  and  those  with  whom  they  lived,  were 
restricted  and  confined  by  his  action  in  every  possible 
way.  He  decided  to  bring  all  under  rule,  but  to  make 
all  worthy  to  command.  So  long  as  the  clergy  were 
impoverished  and  lived  from  hand  to  mouth  on  the 
doles  of  those  whose  fathers  had  robbed  the  Church, 
it  was  impossible  that  their  status  should  be  any  higher 
than  that  of  the  colourless  clergy  that  swarmed  in  the 
lands  where  the  Reformation  had  made  no  way.  Thus, 
as  in  Ireland  he  obtained  the  impropriations  from  the 
Crown  for  the  Church,  in  England  he  endeavoured 
constantly  to  restore  to  the  clergy  the  endowments  of 


86 


WILLTAM  LAUD 


which  the  Church  had  been  deprived.  At  the  same 
time  he  strenuously  resisted  any  attempt  to  turn  these 
endowments  to  the  service  of  a  particular  faction,  and 
the  scheme  to  endow  Puritan  preaching  by  the  purchase 
of  impropriations  was  at  once  suppressed  by  his  hand.1 

The  great  London  church  was  always  very  near  his 
heart.  It  was  through  him  that  "  Paules  "  ceased  to  be 
the  haunt  of  thieves  and  profligates,  and  the  meeting- 
place  for  tramps  and  swashbucklers.  He  organized 
collections  in  every  diocese  for  the  restoration  of  the 
fabric.  He  spent  over  £1200  himself  on  the  work.  He 
obtained  the  grant  of  the  fines  in  the  High  Commission 
Court  to  the  same  object.  He  worked  incessantly,  and 
aroused  often  the  keenest  animosity  by  his  eagerness 
for  the  removal  of  the  houses  that  trenched  upon  the 
cathedral.  The  King  aided  him,  and  Inigo  Jones 
built  the  extraordinary  portico  which  was  tacked  on  to 
the  great  medieval  cathedral.  The  State  papers  are 
full  of  records  of  sums  drawn  from  all  over  England, 
and  the  total  cost  of  the  work  performed  was  over 
£100,000.  It  was  a  great  undertaking,  worthy  of  the 
medieval  and  renaissance  bishops,  who  delighted  in 
building,  and  it  well  illustrates  Laud's  aim  to  revive  the 
dignitv  and  magnificence  of  the  Church. 

It  is  difficult,  as  we  look  through  the  mass  of  literature 
that  entombs  the  history  of  Laud's  work  for  the  Church, 
to  disentangle  the  threads,  and  to  present  any  clear 
image  which  adequately  represents  the  extent  of  his 
multifarious  activity.  Perhaps  we  may  see  it  most 
clearly  in  the  yearly  reports  of  his  province  which 
he  submitted  to  the  King.  We  possess  the  accounts  of 
the  years  1633-39,  with  the  King's  notes,  a  curious 
1  See  Ccmterburie's  Doome,  p.  385  sqq. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


87 


record  of  the  fellow-work  of  sovereign  and  minister. 
They  are  concerned  with  matters  the  most  minute,  as 
well  as  with  more  general  principles,  the  observance  of 
statutes,  the  existence  or  growth  of  nonconformity  or 
recusancy,  excommunications,  non-residence,  the  asser- 
tion of  episcopal  control.  They  show  the  eagerness,  the 
restlessness,  of  Laud's  oversight,  and  they  illustrate  again 
and  again  the  difficulties  with  which  he  had  to  contend. 
Ignorance,  indifference,  vice,  were  his  great  foes ;  and 
he  had  to  withstand  the  opposition  also  of  men  as  able, 
if  not  as  determined,  as  himself.  As  in  the  State  he 
found  Cottington  and  Windebanke  opponents,  if  not 
rivals,  in  the  Church  he  had  to  deal  with  Williams  and 
Goodman. 

Williams  was  a  man  of  great  capacity  and  worldly 
wisdom.  As  Lord-Keeper,  he  had  won  the  respect  of 
many  of  the  lawyers,  though  Clarendon  says  he  was 
"most  generally  abominated."  During  the  last  year  of 
James  I.'s  reign,  he  had  occupied  a  very  prominent 
position,  but  Charles  appears  always  to  have  entertained 
for  him  a  rooted  dislike,  and  Buckingham  became 
eventually  his  bitter  enemy.1  It  was  natural  that  a 
man  so  ambitious,  and  one  who  had  held  so  high  a  place, 
should  resent  his  dismissal  from  office  and  the  order  to 
reside  in  his  diocese,  and  should  dislike  the  man  whom 
the  King  and  favourite  delighted  to  honour  in  his  stead. 

Anything  of  rancour  in  Laud  towards  Williams  is  not 
to  be  discovered  in  his  public  action  or  in  the  corre- 
spondence between  them  which  he  so  carefully  preserved, 
and  which  may  still  be  seen  at  Lambeth, — Williams's 
letters  carefully  endorsed  in  Laud's  own  hand  with  date 
and  subject.  It  was  rather  Charles's  dislike  and 
1  Gardiner,  vol.  viii.  pp.  250,  390. 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Williams's  shiftiness,  with  the  stress  and  tumult  of  the 
times,  that  brought  the  two  men  into  conflict.  Williams 
had  been  charged  with  revealing  the  King's  secrets 
contrary  to  his  oath  as  councillor,  and  later,  on  clear 
evidence,  of  subornation  of  perjury.1  The  scandal  of 
such  an  offence  in  a  bishop  made  a  heavy  penalty  not 
unnatural.  He  was  to  be  imprisoned  during  the  King's 
pleasure,  fined  £10,000,  and,  by  the  Court  of  High 
Commission,  suspended  from  the  exercise  of  his  fvmctions. 
The  sentence,  considering  the  punishments  of  the  time, 
was  not  severe,  and  it  was  natural  that  all  those  who 
highly  regarded  the  clerical  office  should  not  visit  the 
offence  lightly.  Laud  himself  voted  for  the  penalty  as 
it  was  inflicted,  and  his  speech  leaves  no  doubt  of  the 
reasons  which  influenced  him.  It  was  above  all  things 
necessary  to  'preserve  the  highest  standard  of  honour 
among  the  clergy.  The  mendacity  of  Williams  was 
unhappily  notorious,  and  the  flagrant  case  brought 
before  the  courts  was  an  occasion  which  could  not  be 
passed  by.  But  the  scandal  was  none  the  less  felt. 
"  We  have  adversaries  too  many  amongst  ourselves," 
said  Laud,  "  but  this  day's  work  opens  a  way  for  the 
Romanists  to  take  advantage  by  it,  to  see  so  eminent 
a  person  as  a  bishop,  and  so  eminent  a  bishop  as  he, 
to  become  thus  censurable  in  a  thing  of  so  high  a 
nature." 2  Laud's  own  conduct  was  throughout  most 
generous  to  Williams.  "  I  have  been,"  he  stated,  "  five 
several  times  on  my  knees  to  the  King  my  master  on 
his  behalf,"  and  their  correspondence  shows  that  he 
"  dealt  truly  and  really  "  in  the  matter. 

Two  years  later,  Williams  was  again  sentenced  in  the 

1  See  Gardiner,  vol.  viii.  p.  250  sqq. 

2  Speech  at  the  trial  (Works,  vi.  71). 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


89 


Star  Chamber  in  connection  with  letters  found  in  his 
house  in  which  were  very  evident  allusions  to  Laud  as 
"the  little  meddling  hocus-pocus,"  and  "the  little 
urchin."  In  this  case  again  it  is  clear  that  Williams 
perjured  himself.  When  we  add  to  this  record  the 
immortal  infamy  of  which  he  was  guilty  in  advising 
Charles  that  his  public  conscience  might  justly  allow 
Strafford  to  suffer,  while  his  private  conscience  acquitted 
him,  we  cannot  feel  for  Williams  anything  but  con- 
temptuous repugnance.  He  refused  the  offer  of  pardon 
and  a  bishopric  in  Wales  or  Ireland  if  he  would 
acknowledge  his  fault  and  withdraw  his  book  on  the 
Altar.    He  remained  to  be  Laud's  foe  to  the  last.1 

Williams  was  a  man  of  strong  character.  Goodman, 
Bishop  of  Gloucester,  was  weak  and  shallow.  He 
appears  for  a  long  time,  according  to  Panzani,  to  have 
been  a  Roman  Catholic,  while  continuing  to  hold  his 
bishopric.  He  was  greedy  and  avaricious,  and  his 
intrigue  and  vacillation  brought  grave  scandal  upon  his 
profession.  Laud's  correspondence  shows  the  opinion 
he  had  of  him :  but  they  did  not  come  into  open  con- 
flict till  the  Convocation  of  1640,  when  Goodman 
refused  to  sign  the  canons,  which  included  a  strong 
declaration  against  Romanism.  He  was  at  once  sus- 
pended, and  afterwards  committed  to  the  Tower  for 
entering  into  negotiations  with  Rome.  He  died  a 
Papist. 

Two  further  points  remain  to  be  considered,  which 
illustrate  Laud's  theory  of  the  constitutional  position  of 

1  See,  on  the  affair  of  Williams,  his  correspondence  with  Laud 
(vol.  vi.  of  Laud's  Works) ;  Gardiner,  vol.  viii.  pp.  250  sqq.  and  390  ; 
and  Perry,  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  vol.  i.  p.  532  s>f£. 
Laud's  letter  offering  terms  is  Lambeth  MS.  1030,  fol.  G8  b. 


90 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


the  Church,  and  his  use  of  the  system  which  he  found 
in  practical  working. 

The  position  of  the  Church  as  a  separate  Estate,  with 
its  own  privileges,  powers,  and  duties,  was  evidenced  by 
the  continuance  of  the  ancient  Convocations  of  Canter- 
bury and  York,  which  met  by  the  royal  summons  at  the 
time  of  each  session  of  Parliament,  voted  supplies  from 
the  clerical  estate,  and  by  royal  licence  passed  canons 
which  had  for  the  clergy  the  force  of  law.  So  long  as 
Crown,  Church,  and  Parliament  worked  together  with- 
out important  divergence,  Convocation  fulfilled  no  very 
important  function,  and  entered  very  slightly,  if  at  all, 
into  questions  of  national  interest.  Elizabeth  preserved 
the  power  of  the  legislative  assembly  of  the  Church 
unfettered  by  Parliamentary  control,  and  subsequent 
legislation  left  Convocation  legally  subject  to  royal 
authority  alone.1  Its  position  appeared  generally  to  be 
of  little  importance,  judged  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
State :  it  was  an  historical  survival  which  was  not  likely 
to  come  prominently  before  the  public  view.  The 
difficulties  of  Charles,  the  opposition  of  the  Parliament, 
and  the  loyalty  of  Laud,  changed  all  this.  Convocation 
suddenly  intervened  in  the  midst  of  a  political  crisis, 
and  by  the  assertion  of  its  constitutional  but  rarely 
used  powers  tended  to  accentuate  the  difference  and 
precipitate  the  contest  between  Crown  and  Parliament. 

On  April  13,  1G40,  Parliament  met,  and  at  once 
plunged  into  the  discussion  of  the  grave  political 
questions  on  which  the  Commons  were  determined  to 
resist  the  arbitrary  government  of  Charles.  Ship- 
money,  grievances,  the  ecclesiastical  "  innovations,"  the 
fundamental  differences  that  were  becoming  patent  to 
1  Prothero,  Select  Statutes  Eliz.  and  James  I.,  p.  xxxv. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


91 


all — these  came  up  in  turn,  and  the  Commons,  in  spite 
of  Lords  and  Crown,  would  grant  no  supplies  till  these 
great  matters  were  settled.  "  Till  the  liberties  of  the 
House  and  Kingdom  were  cleared,  they  knew  not 
whether  they  had  anything  to  give  or  no."  Angry 
debates,  the  impossibility  of  compromise,  the  bold 
advice  of  Stafford,  brought  about  the  dissolution,  and 
on  May  5  the  Short  Parliament  ceased  to  sit.  Con- 
vocation had  already  sounded  the  note  of  opposi- 
tion, which  showed  on  what  side  the  clergy  would 
stand  in  the  war  which  was  growing  daily  nearer.  On 
April  22  it  had  unanimously  granted  six  subsidies, 
£20,000  a  year  for  six  years,  a  generous  contri- 
bution to  the  national  finances  which  declared  that 
the  Church  approved  while  the  Commons  condemned 
the  system  of  government  to  which  Charles  was  com- 
mitted. When  Parliament  was  dissolved,  the  question 
at  once  arose  as  to  whether  Convocation  could  legally 
continue  to  sit.  Laud  had  taken  care  to  obtain  the 
licence  to  enact  canons,1  which  had  since  1604 2  been 
omitted,  and  it  was  his  special  purpose  to  establish  his 
ecclesiastical  policy  by  the  highest  ecclesiastical  sanc- 
tion, and  to  present  to  the  Parliament  which  claimed 
to  control  the  Church  the  constitutional  opposition  of 
a  united  and  legally  recognized  Estate. 

The  greatest  stress  was  laid  upon  the  constitutional 
force  of  the  royal  letters  patent.  "1.  To  reform  what 
Convocation  shall  find  necessary,  or  to  put  in  practice 
disused  canons  needful  for  this  time  ...  2.  To  satisfy 
the  Parliament  in  such  things  as  they  have  found,  but 
now  more  than  ever  pretend,  to  stand  in  need  of  reform- 

1  Gal.  State  Papers,  Dom.,  Apr.  15,  1640. 

2  Ibid.,  Apr.  12,  p.  24. 


92 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


ation  in  tlie  service  or  discipline  of  the  Church.  It  is 
easier  for  the  clergy  to  cure  their  own  wounds  than  to 
leave  them  in  the  hands  of  strangers.  3.  For  the 
assurance  of  all  Churchmen,  who  either  personally  or 
representatively  appear  in  Convocation,  that  the  King 
expects  them  in  some  way,  viz.  in  making  laws,  and 
that  they  do  not  only  meet  to  give  away  their  own  and 
their  brethren's  money."  1  The  paper  of  advice  in  which 
this  passage  occurs  reveals  an  almost  pathetic  ignorance 
of  the  dangers  with  which  the  Church  was  beset.  It 
appears  to  have  seemed  sufficient  to  Laud  that  he  was 
supported  by  the  Crown  and  had  constitutional  right. 
Policy  or  political  expediency  did  not  enter  into  the 
problem.  Convocation  had  been  summoned  to  do 
certain  work,  and  there  was  no  reason  why  it  should  be 
left  undone  because  Parliament  was  dissolved.  Laud 
seems  to  have  doubted  the  legality  of  the  continued 
session,  but  a  reference  to  the  lawyers  settled  the 
question.  The  Convocation  being  called  by  the 
King's  writ,  under  the  Great  Seal,  doth  continue  until 
it  be  dissolved  by  writ  or  commission  under  the  Great 
Seal,  notwithstanding  that  Parliament  be  dissolved." 
A  few  days  later,  by  special  writs,  the  Convocations 
were  continued  during  pleasure.  Thus  the  consti- 
tutional rights  of  Convocation  were  vindicated.  The 
exercise  of  the  powers  recognized  was,  however,  a 
matter  of  greater  importance.  The  Convocations 
proceeded  to  enact  canons  concerning  "  the  regal 
power  for  suppressing  the  growth  of  popery,"  against 
"  Socinians,"  against  "  sectaries  "  ("  well  knowing 
that  there  are  other  sects  which  endeavour  the  sub- 
version both  of  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of  the 
i  CaJ.  State  rapers,  Dom.,  Apr.  12,  1640,  p.  24. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


93 


Church  of  England  no  less  than  the  papists  do  "),  with 
other  less  important  matters,  and  with  two  more 
prominent  enactments  which  aroused  the  greatest  op- 
position. The  doctrine  of  the  royal  power  enunciated 
in  the  first  canon  may  more  fitly  be  considered  in 
relation  to  Laud's  political  opinions.  There  remains 
the  declaration  concerning  rites,  and  the  "  etcaetera 
oath."  1 

The  seventh  canon  professes  to  be  based  on  the 
obvious  desirability  that  "  uniformity  of  practice  in  the 
outward  worship  and  service  of  God"  should  accompany 
unity  of  faith.  It  proceeds  to  declare  that  the  position 
of  the  "  Communion  table  sideway  under  the  east 
window  of  every  chancel  or  chapel  is  in  its  own  nature 
indifferent,"  but,  quoting  the  injunctions  of  Elizabeth 
and  the  practice  of  the  royal  chapels  and  of  "most 
cathedral  and  some  parochial  churches,"  goes  on  to 
"judge  it  fit  and  convenient  that  all  churches  and 
chapels  do  conform  themselves  in  this  particular  to  the 
example  of  the  cathedral  or  mother  churches,  saving 
always  the  general  liberty  left  to  the  bishop  by  law, 
during  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Communion. 
And  we  declare  that  this  situation  of  the  Holy  Table 
doth  not  imply  that  it  is  or  ought  to  be  esteemed  a 
true  and  proper  altar  wherein  Christ  is  again  really 
sacrificed ;  but  it  is,  and  it  may  be  called  an  altar  by  us 
in  that  sense  in  which  the  primitive  Church  called  it  an 
altar,  and  in  no  other."  The  statement  is  studiously 
moderate.  It  does  no  more,  indeed,  than  give  to  Eliza- 
beth's injunctions  the  force  of  canonical  law.  It  does 
not  even  prohibit  the  removal  of  the  altar  during  the 

1  The  canons,  with  the  royal  declaration,  are  given  in  Laud's 
W orks}  v.  607  sqq. 


94 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


celebration  of  the  Eucharist.  Its  aim  is  rather  authori- 
tatively to  justify  the  action  already  taken  by  Laud's 
metropolitical  visitation,  and  to  express  more  widely 
than  might  otherwise  be  possible  the  general  feeling  of 
the  Church's  constitutional  assembly  in  favour  of  uni- 
formity. The  significance  of  the  doctrinal  declaration 
must  not  of  course  be  exaggerated.  Its  point  lies  in 
the  words,  " wherein  Christ  is  again  really  sacrificed" 
which  mark  the  English  rejection  of  popular  Roman 
teaching  already  condemned  in  the  thirty-first  article  as 
"  blasphemous  fables  and  dangerous  deceits."  The 
primitive  and  Catholic  doctrine  is  expressly  reserved 
by  the  statement  that  the  term  "  altar  "  is  used  in  the 
sense  which  the  primitive  Church  attached  to  the 
word. 

The  canon  goes  on  to  direct  that  the  altars  should 
be  "severed  with  rails"  to  preserve  them  from  profana- 
tion, and  that  communicants  shall  "  draw  near  and 
approach  to  the  Holy  Table,  there  to  receive  the  divine 
mysteries "  which  are  no  longer  to  be  carried  "  up  and 
down  by  the  minister,"  except  in  special  cases  by 
direction  of  the  Ordinary,  an  exception  still  preserved 
at  Christ  Church,  Oxford. 

Lastly,  it  is  adjudged  "  very  meet  and  behoveful  "  that 
all  good  people  should  make  reverence  at  coming  in 
or  going  out  of  church — "  not,"  it  is  carefully  stated, 
"  upon  any  opinion  of  a  corporal  presence  of  the  Body 
of  Jesus  Christ  on  the  Holy  Table  or  in  the  mystical 
elements,  but  only  for  the  advancement  of  God's  Majesty, 
and  to  give  Him  alone  that  honour  and  glory  that  is 
due  unto  Him  and  no  otherwise,"  a  provision  which 
again  is  based  upon  the  Prayer-Book,  and  rejects  only 
the  gross  and  carnal  conception  of  the  Real  Presence 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


95 


which  the  Catholic  Church  has  ever  condemned.  It  is 
characteristic  of  the  conciliatory  temper  in  which  these 
canons  were  framed  that  the  passage  concludes  with  a 
plea  for  mutual  forbearance  and  charity.  "  In  the 
practice  or  omission  of  this  rite  "  (viz.  of  bowing)  "  we 
desire  that  the  rule  of  charity  prescribed  by  the  Apostle 
may  be  observed,  which  is,  that  they  which  use  this 
rite  despise  not  them  who  use  it  not,  and  that  they 
who  use  it  not  condemn  not  those  that  use  it." 

It  is  possible  that  so  far  the  canons  might  have 
passed  without  much  public  comment.  But  it  was  the 
unhappy  fashion  of  the  age  to  delight  to  confirm  its 
opinions  by  oaths.  So  the  House  of  Commons,  under 
Pym's  direction,  had  done — and  Laud  regarded  their 
action  as  a  deliberate  challenge : 1  so  the  Scots  had 
done  in  their  Covenant.  It  was  natural  that  the  Church 
should  desire  to  have  an  oath  from  its  supporters,  as 
the  national  party  in  the  Commons  had  from  theirs. 
An  oath  was  drawn  up  which  was  to  be  taken  by  all 
persons  in  holy  orders,  school-masters,  and  graduates 
(except  sons  of  noblemen).    It  ran  as  follows — 

"  I,  A.  B.,  do  swear  that  I  do  approve  the  doctrine,  and 
discipline,  or  government  established  in  the  Church  of 
England  as  containing  all  things  necessary  to  salvation : 
and  that  I  will  not  endeavour  by  myself  or  any  other, 
directly  or  indirectly,  to  bring,  in  any  popish  doctrine, 
contrary  to  that  which  is  so  established  :  nor  will  I  ever 
give  my  consent  to  alter  the  government  of  this  Church 
by  archbishops,  bishops,  deans,  and  archdeacons,  &c,  as 
it  stands  now  established,  and  as  by  right  it  ought  to 

1  See  Declaration,  Gal.  State  Peters,  Dom.,  Jan.  29,  1G29, 
endorsed  by  Laud,  "  the  Challenge  of  the  Lower  House  in 
Matters  of  Religion." 


96 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


stand,  nor  yet  ever  to  subject  it  to  the  usurpations  and 
superstitions  of  the  See  of  Rome.  And  all  these  things 
I  do  plainly  and  sincerely  acknowledge  and  swear, 
according  to  the  plain  and  common  sense  and  under- 
standing of  the  same  words,  without  any  equivocation, 
or  mental  evasion,  or  secret  reservation  whatsoever. 
And  this  I  do  heartily,  willingly,  and  truly,  upon  the 
faith  of  a  Christian.  So  help  me  God  in  Jesus  Christ." 
Unobjectionable  as  the  terms  of  the  oath  might  be, 
its  form  exposed  it  to  the  most  damaging  criticism. 
"  Etcaetera "  was  at  once  denounced  and  ridiculed. 
What  might  it  not  cover  ?  And  how  swear  to  support 
what  even  Convocation  could  not  specify  ?  It  seems  to 
have  been  a  mere  blunder.  Heylin,  who  was  very 
prominent  in  the  Convocation,  says  the  &c.  was  merely 
inserted  to  avoid  repetition  of  a  long  string  of  officials, 
and  was  retained  by  carelessness  when  the  King  pressed 
for  a  rapid  conclusion  of  the  session.  If  a  blunder,  it  was 
a  most  unfortunate  one.  It  turned  the  laugh  against  the 
Church:  and  those  who  did  not  laugh  thought  that  some 
popish  treachery  lurked  behind  the  innocent  phrases 
of  the  oath.  A  formidable  agitation  sprang  up,  joined 
even  by  the  orthodox  clergy.  In  a  few  weeks  the 
Archbishop,  by  the  King's  order,  directed  that  the  oath 
should  be  "  forborne  .  .  .  till  the  next  ensuing  Con- 
vocation." It  was  the  first  time  Laud  had  abandoned 
a  position  he  had  taken  up  in  Church  matters.  It  was 
the  beginning  of  the  end. 

If  Convocation,  a  body  to  all  seeming  harmless 
enough,  could  thus  stir  popular  feeling,  how  much  more 
readily  would  indignation  be  aroused  against  the  Court 
of  High  Commission ! 

Whatever  may  be  said  as  to  the  disuse  of  the  con- 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


07 


stitutional  powers  of  Convocation,  no  such  objection 
can  be  urged  against  the  High  Commission.1    It  was 
fenced  round  and  about  by  law.    It  had  warrant  for  all 
its  actions.    It  was  the  growth  of  no  antique  system  of 
privilege,  the  expression  of  no  separate  right.    It  was 
a  modern  creation,  the  work  of  Parliament,  and  that 
almost  within  the  memory  of  men  living  when  Laud 
became  Primate.    "  The  group  of  Courts  held  by  virtue 
of  royal  commissions  issued  under  the  Act  of  Supre- 
macy" was  by  the  time  of  Charles  I.  for  all  practical 
purposes,  and  except  on  special  occasions,  resolved  into 
that  "  Court  of  High  Commission  "  which  sat  in  London. 
The  duty  of  the  Court  was,  especially,  to  enforce  the 
Acts  of  Supremacy  and  Uniformity  :  but  in  other  points 
it  trenched  upon  the  provinces  of  the  ancient  eccle- 
siastical courts,  which  its  action  tended  practically  to 
supersede.     Constitutionally  the  bishops  should  have 
acted  in  their  own  courts,  and  according  to  the  rules  of 
ecclesiastical  law.    Practical  convenience,  however,  and 
the  strong  pressure  of  the  State,  which  could  exercise  a 
much  more  direct  control  over  the  newly-created  court 
than  over  those  which  were  not  tied  down  by  recent 
statutes,  made  the  High  Commission  assume  the  position 
of  the  most  prominent,  if  not  the  only  important,  tribunal 
for  the  trial  of  ecclesiastical  offences.  It  was  an  attempt 
at  a  short  cut  towards  the  reformation  of  abuses.  It 
stood  side  by  side  with  the  Star  Chamber  and  the 
Court  of  Requests.    But  the  good  accomplished  was 
dearly  purchased  by  the  violation  of  constitutional  right 

1  I  cannot  but  refer  to  the  extremely  lucid  and  thorough 
account  of  the  legal  and  constitutional  position  of  this  Court 
given  by  Professor  Prothero,  Statutes  and  Documents,  &c,  p. 
xl.  sqq. 


98 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


involved  in  its  original  creation,  and  the  unpopularity 
which  its  procedure  cast  upon  the  Church  at  large. 

Under  Laud's  primacy  it  proceeded  against  those 
offenders  whose  opinions  were  most  strong  in  Parlia- 
ment :  nor  would  the  lawyers,  who  led  the  party  through 
which  it  was  finally  overthrown,  ever  pardon  the  initial 
infringement  of  constitutional  balance  inseparable  from 
its  existence.  It  was  the  foe  of  the  Puritans  and  the 
bugbear  of  the  Common  Lawyers.  And  its  creation 
was  an  unconstitutional  encroachment  on  the  rights  of 
the  clergy.  These  facts  are  sufficient  to  account  for  the 
general  delight  at  its  abolition.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
invent  any  charges  of  extreme  or  illegal  severity  against 
its  action,  or  to  talk  of  a  "  policy  of  rack  and  thumb- 
screw." Probably  no  human  institution  has  ever  been 
more  irrationally,  or  more  untruthfully,  attacked. 
Happily  we  have  sufficient  evidence  to  enable  us  to 
form,  as  Mr.  Gardiner  has  done,  an  unbiassed  and 
judicial  conclusion  as  to  its  methods  and  its  defects. 

Its  great  defects  were,  in  an  exaggerated  form,  those 
of  the  other  law  courts  of  the  day.  They  were,  chiefly, 
the  exercise  of  the  "  ex-officio  oath,"  by  which  persons 
could  be  required  to  give  evidence,  in  certain  cases, 
against  themselves,  and  the  general  style  of  browbeat- 
ing and  unfairness  in  the  treatment  of  evidence  which 
seems  to  us  to  be  the  characteristic  of  all  the  tribunals 
of  the  time.  But  in  particular  cases  it  is  difficult  to 
condemn  the  sentences  given. 

Happily  we  are  able  to  judge  of  the  general  working 
of  the  court  from  the  Act  books,  covering  two  years  and 
three  months,  which  have  been  preserved.  "  It  should 
be  remembered,"  says  Mr.  Gardiner,1  who  has  made  a 
J  Hist.  Engl,  vol.  x.  p.  224. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH  99 

classified  list  of  the  cases,  "  that  these  years  begin  very 
shortly  after  Laud's  accession  to  the  archbishopric,  and 
they  are  therefore  exactly  the  years  in  which  the  action 
of  the  court  would  be  likely  to  be  most  vigorous." 
It  will  be  well  to  examine  the  cases  in  some  detail. 
During  this  period  only  two  clergymen  were  sentenced 
to  deposition  from  the  ministry ;  the  one  for  a  grave 
moral  offence,  the  other  for  teaching  that  Saturday 
should  be  observed  as  the  sabbath.  The  sentence  in 
the  latter  case  was  on  submission  wholly  remitted. 

Only  four  were  sentenced  to  be  deprived  of  their 
benefices  and  suspended  from  the  exercise  of  their 
functions.  The  sentence  of  one  of  these,  which  was 
inflicted  for  nonconformity,  was  changed  to  suspension 
on  his  consenting  to  discuss  his  difficulties  with  his 
bishop,  and  it  seems  probable  that  it  was  eventually 
remitted.  Another  was  guilty  of  dishonesty.  The  two 
others  were  condemned  for  reviling  their  parishioners : 
their  suspensions  were  removed,  in  one  case  within  six, 
in  the  other  within  eighteen,  months. 

Lastly,  eight  were  suspended.  Of  these,  one  was 
allowed  before  long  to  resume  his  ministry,  and  another 
was  wholly  pardoned.  Of  the  others,  only  three  cases 
could  be  open  to  objection  on  any  ground.  John  How 
was  condemned  for  praying  that  the  Prince  of  Wales 
"  might  not  be  brought  up  in  Popery,  whereof  there 
is  great  cause  to  fear,"  George  Burdett  for  preaching 
against  the  ceremonies,  and  Samuel  Ward  for  a  similar 
offence.  It  is  obvious  that  no  charge  of  undue  severity 
can  be  based  on  these  cases.  If  the  Church  was  to 
have  any  discipline  at  all,  some  sanction  must  be 
attached  to  the  acts  of  her  constituted  authorities. 
Judged  by  these  sentences,  the  Court  of  High  Com- 


100 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


mission  compares  very  favourably  with  any  other  court 
of  the  time. 

The  test  may,  however,  be  carried  further.  Among 
the  mass  of  cases  of  which  we  have  some  knowledge 
there  stand  out  those  of  Leightou,  Chauncy,  Ward, 
Barnard,  Sir  Giles  Alington,  and  Lady  Eleanor  Davies. 
Leighton,  whose  bitter  animosity  against  Laud  has 
made  his  name  famous  in  the  annals  of  Nonconformity, 
was  degraded  by  the  High  Commission  before  the  cruel 
sentence  of  the  Star  Chamber  was  carried  out.  This 
was  a  natural  consequence  of  the  sentence  in  the 
other  court.  Chauncy  had  denounced  the  railing  in  of 
the  altar  in  the  church  at  Ware,  of  which  he  had 
formerly  been  minister.  He  "  spoke  reproachful  words 
against  authority,  and  in  contempt  of  his  Ordinary  .  .  . 
and  said  that  the  rails  were  fit  to  be  set  up  in 
his  garden ;  that  he  came  fifty  miles  from  his  own 
church  on  purpose  to  countenance  this  business.  And 
all  this  he  acknowledges  upon  his  oath  in  his  sub- 
mission." 1  In  his  case  the  sentence  of  suspension  was 
wholly  remitted.  Samuel  Ward,  whose  subsequent 
career  showed  him  to  be  a  convinced  opponent  of  the 
historic  teaching  of  the  Church,  was  sentenced  to  sus- 
pension for  contemning  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.2 
He  was  committed  to  prison  as  contumacious,  for 
declining  to  acknowledge  the  truth  of  the  charges 
against  him.  His  case  is  the  most  hard  of  those  that 
have  been  preserved,  for  he  appears  to  have  been  con- 
demned simply  for  the  violence  of  his  criticism  of  the 
Laudian  order.    It  was  said  that  he  had  declared  "  that 

1  Laud's  Works,  iv.  232. 

2  So  Laud's  Works,  v.  331.  Cf.  Prynne,  Cant.  Doome,  p.  361  ; 
Cal.  State  Papers,  Dom.,  1635-6,  preface. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


101 


a  parrot  might  be  instructed  to  repeat  set  forms,  and 
that  an  ape  might  be  taught  to  bow  and  gesticulate." 
But  language  such  as  this  was  certainly  calculated,  if 
not  intended,  to  bring  the  Church  into  contempt;  and 
it  was  not  unnatural  that  the  court  should  suspend 
him  from  the  exercise  of  functions  on  which  he  seems 
to  have  set  such  little  store. 

Barnard  1  was  severely  sentenced,  on  the  accusation 
of  the  pious  and  gentle  Comber,  Master  of  Trinity,  for 
a  sermon  in  which  he  categorically  accused  the  leaders 
of  the  English  Church  of  symbolizing  with  Rome,  and 
declared  that  no  Roman  Catholic  could  be  saved. 

The  cases  of  the  laity  were  different.  Fines  and 
censures  were  awarded  for  open  and  ribald  denunciation 
of  Church  ceremony  or  for  sacrilegious  acts  such  as 
that  of  Sherfield  at  Salisbury,  but  the  great  majority 
of  the  cases  with  which  the  court  was  concerned 
were  moral  offences.  And  in  this  Laud  was  un- 
questionably the  prime  mover.  "  If  the  faults  and 
vices  were  fit  to  be  looked  into  and  discovered,"  says 
Clarendon,  in  one  of  his  most  luminous  passages,  "  let 
the  persons  be  who  they  Avould  that  were  guilty  of  them, 
they  were  sure  to  find  no  connivance  or  favour  from 
him.  He  intended  the  discipline  of  the  Church  should 
be  felt,  as  well  as  spoken  of,  and  that  it  should  be 
applied  to  the  greatest  and  most  splendid  transgressors 
as  well  as  to  the  punishment  of  smaller  offences  and 
meaner  offenders;  and  thereupon  called  for  or  cherished 
the  discovery  of  those  who  were  not  careful  to  cover 
their  own  iniquities,  thinking  they  were  above  the 

1  His  case  is  given  in  Prynne,  Cant.  Doome,  p.  364  sqq.,  Lut  it 
is  difficult  to  rely  upon  its  accuracy  ;  and  in  Laud's  Works,  iv. 
302. 


102 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


reach  of  other  men,  or  their  power  or  will  to  chastise. 
Persons  of  honour  and  great  quality,  of  the  Court  and 
of  the  country,  were  every  day  cited  into  the  High 
Commission  Court,  upon  the  fame  of  their  incontin- 
ence, or  other  scandal  in  their  lives,  and  were  there 
prosecuted  to  their  shame  and  punishment :  and  as 
the  shame  (which  they  called  an  insolent  triumph  upon 
their  degree  and  quality,  and  levelling  them  with  the 
common  people)  was  never  forgotten,  but  watched  for 
revenge,  so  the  fines  imposed  there  were  the  more 
questioned  and  repined  against,  because  they  were 
assigned  to  the  rebuilding  and  repairing  of  S.  Paul's 
church,  and  thought  therefore  to  be  the  more  severely 
imposed,  and  the  less  compassionately  reduced  and 
excused." 

"  In  questions  relating  to  marriage  the  court 
struggled,"  says  Mr.  Gardiner,  "against  every  kind 
of  opposition,  to  uphold  the  standard  of  a  high 
morality."  Frances  Coke,  the  wife  of  Buckingham's 
coarse  and  half-witted  brother,  Lord  Purbeck,  had  left 
him,  and  lived  in  adultery  with  Sir  Robert  Howard. 
The  High  Commission  issued  an  order  for  a  separation, 
and  enjoined  upon  the  lady  a  public  penance.  She 
evaded  the  penance,  and  after  some  years  ventured  to 
return  to  London  with  her  paramour.  She  was  at 
once  imprisoned,  and  the  penance  was  required  to  be 
performed.  She  escaped  before  the  day  arrived.  The 
sentence  showed  a  courageous  desire  to  deal  with 
vice  in  high  places.  As  great  a  scandal  was  that  of 
Sir  Giles  Alington,  who  married  his  own  niece.  He 
was  summoned  before  the  High  Commission,  but  by 
playing  upon  the  jealousy  of  the  Common  lawyers 
secured  a  prohibition  from  the  Common  Pleas.  The 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


103 


High  Commission  took  no  heed,  and  gave  a  sentence 
of  £12,000  fine.  Laud  spoke  bravely,  "If  this  pro- 
hibition had  taken  place,  I  hope  my  Lord's  Grace  of 
Canterbury  would  have  excommunicated  throughout 
his  province  all  the  judges  who  should  have  had  a 
hand  therein.  For  mine  own  part,  I  will  assure  you, 
if  he  would  not  I  would  have  done  it  in  my  diocese, 
and  myself  in  person  denounced  it,  both  in  Paul's 
church  and  other  churches  of  the  same,  against  the 
authors  of  so  enormous  a  scandal  to  our  Church  and 
religion."  "  It  was  spoken,"  said  an  observer,  "  like  a 
bishop  indeed."  1 

The  case  of  Lady  Eleanor  Davies  stands  by  itself. 
She  was  a  lunatic,  but  of  sufficient  sanity  to  cause  a 
great  deal  of  trouble,  and  it  was  long  before  the  courts 
would  recognize  her  as  mad.  She  wrote  bad  verses  and 
made  foolish  prophecies,  and  was  delighted  with  an 
anagram  which  made  her  name  produce,  "  Reveale  o 
Daniel."  Sir  John  Lambe  told  her  that  a  better 
anagram  was  "  Never  so  mad  a  Ladie."  She  was  fined 
£3000  and  imprisoned.  Not  content  with  this,  she 
identified  Laud  with  the  Beast  of  the  Apocalypse,  and 
prophesied  his  decease  within  a  month.  Laud,  how- 
ever, was  not  concerned  with  her  trial,  and  took  her 
revelations  very  lightly.2  A  few  years  later  her  mad- 
ness broke  out  again,  and  she  entered  Lichfield  Cathe- 
dral "  with  a  kettle  in  one  hand  and  a  brush  in  the 
other  to  sprinkle  some  of  her  holy  water  (as  she  called 
that  in  the  kettle)  upon  the  (altar)  hangings  and  the 
bishop's  seat,  which  was  only  a  composition  of  tar, 

1  Sir  Robert  was  fined  for  aiding  her  escape.  It  is  a  curious 
comment  on  Puritanism,  that  Laud  was  by  the  Long  Parliament 
ordered  to  pay  him  ,£500  for  false  imprisonment. 

2  See  his  letter  to  Strafford,  Works,  vi.  331-3. 


104 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


pitch,  sink-puddle  water,  &c,  and  such  kind  of  nasty 
ingredients."  After  this  she  was,  none  too  soon,  removed 
to  Bedlam. 

The  volume1  of  reports  of  cases  taken  from  the 
Harleian  and  Rawlinson  MSS.  gives  illustrations  of 
Laud's  action  in  the  High  Commission  Court  at  an 
earlier  period,  from  October  1G31  to  June  1632.  None 
of  the  cases  are  of  any  great  interest,  but  they  serve  as 
excellent  examples  of  the  ordinary  work  of  the  court. 
Gross  libel  charges  and  moral  offences  appear  side  by 
side  with  measures  for  the  preservation  of  decency  in 
worship  and  the  suppression  of  conventicles.  Laud 
appears  severe  on  occasion,  but  by  no  means  more 
severe  than  Abbot ;  and  he  shows  the  strong  sense  of 
justice  and  the  shrewd  acuteness  in  grasping  points  of 
importance  which  we  have  learnt  to  look  for.  Of  the 
recusancy  fines  he  said  in  the  Star  Chamber  very 
truly,  "  52  shillings  a  year  is  no  persecution."  2  Yet 
when  Roman  vestments  were  seized  he  insisted  that 
their  full  value  should  be  paid.3  Against  the  seats 
in  churches  above  the  altar  he  waged  strenuous  war, 
"  You  must  not  prepare  your  seats  above  God."  4 

From  such  cases,  and  such  illustrations,  we  may  draw 
a  fair  picture  of  the  ordinary  work  of  the  High  Com- 
mission. "  No  one,"  says  the  great  living  authority  on 
this  period,  "  who  has  studied  its  records  will  speak  of 
it  as  a  barbarous  or  even  a  cruel  tribunal."  In  its 
treatment  of  moral  offences  it  was  severe,  but  no  more 
severe  than  the  times  imperatively  demanded.  Its 
conscientious  and  courageous  defence  of  the  purity  of 

1  Reports  of  Cases  in  the  Courts  of  Star  Chamber  and  High 
Commission,  edited  by  Samuel  Kawson  Gardiner,  LL.D.  Camden 
Society,  1886. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  105.        3  Ibid.,  p.  196.         4  Ibid.,  p.  296. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


105 


the  marriage  tie,  and  of  the  cause  of  injured  women, 
shows  that  the  King's  party  was  at  least  as  much  alive 
as  its  opponents  to  the  moral  evils  of  the  age.  In  its 
action  with  regard  to  conformity,  a  careful  examination 
shows  it  to  have  rarely  outstepped  the  most  moderate 
punishments  which  the  offences  allowed. 

With  regard  to  Laud's  own  position  in  the  court,  it 
must  not  be  forgotten  that  all  through  his  trial,  though 
he  defended  the  sentences  in  particular  cases,  he  stead- 
fastly repudiated  all  responsibility  beyond  that  for  his 
own  vote.  "  All  this  is  the  act  of  the  High  Commission, 
not  mine."  1  "  In  the  High  Commission  we  meddled 
with  no  cause  not  cognizable  there  .  .  .  and  meddling 
with  nothing  but  things  proper  to  them,  I  conceive  no 
one  man  can  be  singled  out  to  suffer  for  that  which  was 
done  by  all."  The  Archbishop's  vote  was  not  given 
generally  till  last,  and  he  again  and  again  declared  that 
he  never  influenced  another  man's  decision.  He  was 
never  hasty  to  condemn,  and  always  ready  to  defer 
judgment,  or  to  confer  with  nonconforming  ministers 
himself,  on  the  chance  of  arriving  at  a  satisfactory 
conclusion.2  His  action  will  well  bear  a  comparison 
with  that  of  his  Puritan  predecessor,  Abbot. 

From  the  High  Commission,  in  which  his  action 
belongs  at  least  as  much  to  his  position  as  to  his 
character,  it  is  pleasant  to  pass  to  Laud's  relations  with 
the  Universities. 

1  Works,  iv.  232,  235. 

2  See  Letter  of  Dr.  W.  Yonge  to  Laud,  Oct.  19,  1G31  (Cul.  State 
Papers)— Concerning  some  ministers  that  refused  to  subscribe 
and  conform,  the  writer  is  a  witness  of  the  bishop's  patient  for- 
bearing them,  giving  them  time  to  consult  conformable  ministers, 
and  vouchsafing  to  confer  with  them  himself.  Nor  has  he  ever 
heard  that  any  have  been  deprived  but  such  as  utterly  refused  to 
conform. 


106 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Few  of  Laud's  many  interests  lay  nearer  to  his  heart 
than  his  love  of  learning.  It  was  his  great  wish  to  see 
the  English  Church  the  home  of  a  learned  clergy. 
While  the  Reformation  and  the  Renaissance  which 
accompanied  it  in  England  had  tended  to  raise  the 
standard  of  education  throughout  the  country,  the 
difficulty  of  providing  clergy,  under  the  new  circum- 
stances, had  resulted  in  the  advance  in  the  learning  of 
the  clerical  estate  being  slower,  in  proportion,  than  in 
that  of  the  more  leisured  classes.  It  was,  for  the  time, 
exceptionally  difficult  to  be  both  a  priest  and  a  scholar. 
A  life  of  learning  was  difficult  when  the  moral  and 
intellectual  demands  upon  the  clergy  were  so  great. 
Laud,  who  owed  himself  so  much  to  his  college  training, 
and  retained  perhaps  all  his  life  something  of  the 
characteristics  of  a  college  don,  was  especially  eager  to 
encourage  the  work  of  the  Universities  in  its  relation 
to  the  general  work  of  the  Church.  When  he  ceased 
to  reside  in  Oxford,  he  did  not  abate  his  interest  in  the 
University  or  in  his  own  college.  To  S.  John's  he  was 
a  constant  benefactor.  Year  by  year  he  sent  down 
books  and  MSS.  to  the  college  library.  Many  magni- 
ficent folios  stamped  with  the  arms  of  Canterbury  and 
of  Laud  still  recall  his  generosity  to  his  old  college. 
Most  of  them  are  rare  editions,  or  valuable  copies  of 
classical  authors,  and  many  are  elaborately  illustrated 
books.  The  bindings  are  in  every  case  of  beautiful 
workmanship,  ranging  from  finely-tooled  morocco  to 
plain  velvet.  One  of  his  choicest  gifts  was  the  Whole 
Law  of  Moses,  from  Little  Gidding,  bound  in  purple 
velvet.1    Still  more  precious  were  his  gifts  of  MSS. 

1  Not,  as  Macray,  Annals  of  the  Bodleian,  2nd  edit.,  p.  07,  in 
green. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


107 


These  began  as  early  as  1610,  when  he  was  still  Fellow, 
and  continued  till  the  close  of  his  life.  He  presented 
to  S.  John's  in  all  thirty  MSS.,of  which  a  large  number 
are  in  Oriental  languages.  Many  of  these  doubtless 
reached  him  through  the  Turkey  Company,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  King's  order  of  February  1634,  that 
"  every  ship  of  that  company  at  every  voyage  shall 
bring  home  one  Arabic  or  Persian  MS.  book,  to  be 
delivered  to  the  master  of  the  Company,  and  by  him  to 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  shall  dispose  of 
them  as  the  King  shall  think  fit."  1  Pococke  too  had 
opened  relations  with  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople, 
and  another  agent,  Graves,  was  collecting  in  Egypt. 

To  the  Bodleian  library,  as  to  his  own  college,  he  was 
a  generous  benefactor.  In  1629  he  procured  from  his 
old  friend,  Sir  Thomas  Roe,  who  had  been  ambassador 
at  Constantinople,  many  valuable  MSS.  Through  him 
the  Barocci  MSS.  were  presented  by  the  Earl  of  Pem- 
broke, his  predecessor  as  Chancellor  of  the  University, 
and  the  238  MSS.  collected  by  Thomas  Allen  were 
given  by  Sir  Kenelm  Digby.  In  1635  and  1636  he  was 
especially  generous  in  benefaction.  He  gave  in  the 
first  year  462  volumes  of  MSS.  and  five  rolls.  Among 
these  were  some  of  the  spoils  of  Wuirtzburg,  taken  by 
the  Swedes  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War.  To  these  in 
1636  he  added  181  MSS.  and  five  cabinets  of  coins. 
In  1639  he  gave  nearly  600  MSS.,  and  in  the  last  year 
of  his  Chancellorship  he  sent  many  more,  with  a 
pathetic  letter  in  which  the  dangers  of  the  times  are 
bewailed.  His  whole  benefaction  consisted  of  over 
1300  MSS.  in  twelve  languages,  very  largely  "spolia 
Orientis,"  as  the  University  declared.  Few,  if  any,  gifts 
1  Cal.  State  Papers,  1633-34,  p.  477. 


108 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


of  more  value  have  ever  been  received  by  a  great 
library,  and  none,  it  may  be  safely  said,  display  so 
clearly  at  once  the  generosity  and  the  discernment  of 
the  giver.  The  Bodleian  Library,  as  well  as  S.  John's 
College,  is  an  abiding  memorial  of  the  greatest  prelate 
that  the  University  has  produced  since  the  Reformation.1 

In  the  midst  of  the  multifarious  interests  by  which 
he  was  surrounded,  Laud  always  retained  Lis  close 
connection  with  Oxford.  When  he  ceased  to  reside  he 
was  kept  constantly  informed  of  the  doings  of  the 
University.  Juxon,  his  successor  at  S.  John's,  was  his 
regular  correspondent.  Baylie,  whom  he  had  promoted 
on  every  occasion,  often  brought  him  the  latest  news, 
and,  as  his  chaplain,  served  to  bind  him  still  to  the 
society  that  he  loved.  And  he  had  always  kept  up  his 
affection  for  his  "  old  friend  "  Sir  William  Paddy. 

It  had  always  been  the  custom  for  the  University 
to  elect  as  Chancellor  some  prominent  nobleman  whose 
support  could  be  relied  upon.  When,  in  1630,  the  Earl 
of  Pembroke  died,  it  was  felt  that  Laud  was  at  once 
the  most  prominent  patron  and  the  most  generous 
benefactor  whom  the  University  could  honour  by  its 
choice.  He  was  elected  to  the  vacant  post  on  April  12, 
and  threw  himself  at  once  into  the  discharge  of  its 
duties  with  his  accustomed  energy.  One  of  his  first 
thoughts  was  for  his  own  college.  S.  John's  was  a 
very  small  society,  and  its  buildings  were  still,  with  but 
slight  additions,  those  of  the  old  Cistercian  house  which 
had  been  purchased  by  the  founder,  Sir  Thomas  White. 
Already  the  college  was  feeling  cramped  in  its  small 
habitation.    Laud  wished  to  attract  the  sons  of  dis- 

1  Mr.  Macray's  classical  Anuuh  of  the  Bodleian  contains  a  full 
account  of  Laud's  benefactions  to  the  Library. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


109 


tinguished  men.  The  old  buildings  did  not  seem  to 
afford  proper  accommodation.  The  President's  house, 
too,  was  small  compared  to  those  of  the  other  heads 
whose  equal  he  had  now  become.  Laud  determined,  in 
November  1630,  "to  build  at  S.  John's  in  Oxford, 
where  I  was  bred  up,  for  the  good  and  safety  of  that 
college."  He  set  about  the  work  with  characteristic 
precision.  He  procured  from  the  King  a  grant  of 
timber  from  the  forests  of  Stow  and  Shotover  :  the  rest 
of  the  work  came  entirely  from  his  own  generosity. 
It  is  supposed  that  the  plans  were  the  work  of  Inigo 
Jones  :  the  design  was  at  least  new  to  Oxford,  and 
marked,  if  it  did  not  originate,  a  departure  in  English 
architecture. 

Beyond  the  old  buildings,  one  side  of  a  quadrangle 
was  already  erected.  It  had  been  completed  as  a 
library  in  1596.  Laud  finished  the  court.  Facing 
the  college  groves  he  built  the  exquisite  "garden  front," 
which  is  one  of  the  most  beautiful  features  of  Oxford  as 
we  know  it.  Taking  the  east  end  of  the  already  existing 
library  as  a  model,  the  architect  with  extraordinary 
skill  produced  a  long  facade  in  which  suggestions  of 
classical  style  were  harmoniously  mingled  with  the 
late  Perpendicular  domestic  architecture  of  the  original. 
The  work  is  well  worthy  of  detailed  examination.  The 
plan  of  the  interior  of  the  quadrangle  was  at  the  time 
unique.  At  the  east  and  west  sides  were  built  cloisters 
of  purely  Renaissance  design,  in  the  style  so  familiar  at 
Bologna  and  elsewhere  in  Italy,  but  hitherto  unknown 
in  England.  Above  the  cloisters  were  the  long  gallery 
added  to  the  President's  house  and  the  "  new  library  " 
which  Laud  provided  for  the  books  which  he  was  con- 
stantly sending  down  to  his  old  college.    The  cloisters, 


no 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


wrote  Juxon,1  were  "  of  the  largest  size  that  art  can 
allow,  and  the  pillars  of  the  best  stone,  under  marble, 
growing  (sic)  in  that  part  of  England.  The  cloisters,"  he 
added,  were  "  of  a  form  not  yet  seen  in  Oxford  (for 
that  under  Jesus  College  Library  is  a  misfeatured 
thing)." 

The  work,  begun  in  1631,  was  completed  in  1636. 
The  total  cost  of  the  building  appears  to  have  been 
£3,208  4s.  3c/.2  Laud  added  two  bronze  statues  of 
Charles  and  Henrietta  Maria,  life  size,  the  work  of 
Hubert  Le  Sueur,  the  cost  of  which  was  £40 0.3  The 
work  when  completed  may  be  said  to  have  placed  the 
college  architecturally  iu  the  front  rank  even  among 
the  artistic  glories  of  Oxford :  and  the  effect  upon  the 
status  of  the  foundation,  which  Laud's  work  had  in 
other  ways  tended  to  raise,  was  marked.  The  new 
buildings  were  the  completion  of  the  work  of  the 
"  second  founder,"  which  gave  to  Sir  Thomas  White's 
college,  for  a  time,  the  leading  place  in  the  University. 
Well  might  the  President  and  Fellows  exceed  the  lan- 
guage of  academic  eulogy,  and  declare  that  "if  their 
gratitude  were  mute,  the  very  stones  of  their  college 
would,  like  the  statue  of  Memnon,  commemorated  by 
Tacitus,  give  forth  music  to  his  glory."  4 

The  new  buildings  were  opened  on  the  occasion  of  a 
visit  of  the  King  and  Queen.5  Laud  as  the  Chancellor  of 
the  University  welcomed  the  royal  party  with  elaborate 

1  Cal.  State  Papers,  March  12,  1632. 

2  Dr.  R.  Baylie  to  Laud,  Cal.  State  Papers,  April  23,  1636. 
See  also  Cal.  State  Papers,  April  16,  1631,  March  12,  1632, 
March  19,  1632,  October  31,  1633,  November  28,  1633,  &c. 

3  See  Cal.  State  Papers,  May  2,  1633,  and  May  3,  1634. 

4  Cal.  State  Papers,  April  15,  1631. 

3  See  Hist,  of  Chancellorship,  Works,  v.  144  sqq. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


111 


ceremonial.  It  was  a  memorable  year  for  S.  John's 
and  for  Laud.  On  March  6,  Juxon,  then  Bishop  of 
London,  and  formerly  President,  had  been  made  Lord 
High  Treasurer  of  England.  In  June,  Laud  had 
established  his  right  to  visit  both  Universities  jure 
metropolitico,  and  had  completed  his  revision  of  the 
statutes  and  promulgated  the  new  code.  Dr.  Baylie,  the 
President  of  S.  John's,  was  the  Vice-Chancellor.  The 
royal  visit  lasted  from  the  29th  to  the  31st  of  August. 
The  King,  as  usual,  resided  in  Christ  Church,1  and  the 
customary  speeches  and  sermons  were  delivered.  The 
Elector  Palatine  and  Prince  Rupert,  sons  of  Charles's 
unhappy  sister  Elizabeth,  received  honorary  degrees, 
and  their  names  were  entered  on  the  books  of  S.  John's. 
Laud  gave  a  brief  and  happy  Latin  speech  in  Convo- 
cation, in  the  style  of  all  academic  discourses,  com- 
plimenting the  princes,  eulogizing  the  University,  and 
jesting  at  his  own  disuse  of  the  learned  language.  But 
the  most  prominent  feature  of  the  royal  sojourn  was  the 
visit  to  S.  John's. 

On  Tuesday  the  30th  ("it  was  S.  Felix  his  day," 
Laud,  with  his  love  of  good  omens,  notes  in  his  diary, 
"  and  all  passed  happily  ")  the  King  and  Queen  came  to 
the  Chancellor's  college.  "  When  they  were  come  to 
S.  John's  they  first  viewed  the  new  building,  and,  that 
done,  I  attended  them  up  the  library  stairs ;  where,  so 
soon  as  they  began  to  ascend,  the  music  began,  and  they 
had  a  fine  short  song  fitted  for  them  as  they  ascended 
the  stairs."  When  they  had  passed  through  the  door, 
over  which  the  King's  bust  (most  probably  by  Le  Sueur) 

1  The  current  Oxford  legend  that  he  stayed  at  S.  John's  has 
no  foundation,  nor  is  there  any  reason  why  the  rooms  at  the  end  of 
Laud's  library  should  be  called  "  King  Charles's  rooms." 


112 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


now  stands,  they  entered  the  old  library  which  Sir 
Thomas  White  had  begun,  and  the  Merchant  Taylors' 
Company  had  helped  to  complete.  This  was  the  room 
most  used  for  private  study,  aud  the  book-shelves  were 
fitted  with  desks  at  which  the  great  folios  could  be  read. 
There,  one  of  the  Fellows,  Abraham  Wright,  welcomed 
them  with  a  speech.  Then,  continues  Laud,  "dinner 
being  ready,  they  passed  from  the  old  into  the  new  library, 
built  by  myself,  where  the  King,  the  Queen,  and  the 
Prince  Elector  dined  at  one  table,  which  stood  cross 
at  the  upper  end.  And  Prince  Rupert,  with  all  the 
lords  and  ladies  present,  which  were  very  many,  dined 
at  a  long  table  in  the  same  room.  All  other  several 
tables,  to  the  number  of  thirteen  besides  these  two, 
were  disposed  in  several  chambers  of  the  college,  and 
had  several  men  appointed  to  attend  them ;  and  I 
thank  God  I  had  that  happiness,  that  all  things  were  in 
very  good  order,  and  that  no  man  went  out  at  the  gates, 
courtier  or  other,  but  content ;  which  was  a  happiness 
quite  beyond  expectation." 

We  learn  from  an  Oxford  diarist  that  "the  baked 
meats  served  up  in  S.  John's  were  so  contrived  by  the 
cook  that  there  was  first  the  forms  of  archbishops,  then 
bishops,  doctors,  &c,  seen  in  order,  wherein  the  King 
and  courtiers  took  much  content."  It  was,  says  a 
letter-writer,  "  a  mighty  feast."  1 

"  When  dinner  was  ended,"  Laud  continues,  "  I 
attended  the  King  and  the  Queen  together  with  the 
nobles  into  several  withdrawing  chambers,2  where  they 

1  George  Garrard,  to  Edward  Lord  Conway,  September  4, 1636 
(Cal.  State  Papers,  1636-7,  p.  113). 

2  It  is  probable  that  the  room  at  the  north  end  of  the  library, 
which  then  very  likely  opened  into  it,  and  the  rooms  from  thence 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


113 


entertained  themselves  for  the  space  of  an  hour.  And 
in  the  meantime  I  caused  the  windows  of  the  hall  to 
be  shut,  the  candles  lighted,  and  all  things  made  ready 
for  the  pla)T  to  begin.  When  these  things  were  fitted, 
I  gave  notice  to  the  King  and  the  Queen,  and  attended 
them  into  the  hall,  whither  I  had  the  happiness  to 
bring  them  by  a  way  prepared  from  the  President's 
lodging  to  the  hall  without  any  the  least  disturbance  : 
and  had  the  hall  kept  as  fresh  and  cool,  that  there  was 
not  any  one  person  when  the  King  and  Queen  came 
into  it.  The  princes,  nobles,  and  ladies  entered  the 
same  way  with  the  King,  and  then  presently  another 
door  was  opened  below  to  fill  the  hall  with  the  better 
sort  of  company,  which  being  done  the  play  was  begun 
and  acted."  It  was  Loves  Hospital,  written  by  George 
Wilde,  one  of  the  Fellows,  who  after  the  Restoration 
became  Bishop  of  Deny.  "  The  plot  was  very  good, 
and  the  action.  It  was  merry,  and  without  offence, 
and  so  gave  a  great  deal  of  content."  S.  John's  had 
long  been  a  home  of  acting,  since  the  time  when  the 
Christmas  Prince  had  been  the  envy  of  the  University, 
and  Laud  adds  with  pride  that  "  the  college  was  at  that 
time  so  well  furnished  that  they  did  not  borrow  any  one 
actor  from  any  college  in  town."  When  the  play  was 
over,  the  King  and  Queen  returned  to  Christ  Church  ; 
and  the  next  day  they  left  Oxford,  with  "a  great  deal 
of  thanks."  On  the  evening  of  the  31st,  Laud  gave  a 
dinner  in  his  new  library  to  the  heads  of  colleges, 
doctors,  and  proctors,  "  which  gave  the  University  a 
great  deal  of  content,  being  that  which  had  never  been 
done  by  any  Chancellor  before.    I  sat  with  them,"  he 

to  the  President's  house,  which  were  then  all  connected,  were 
used  as  "withdrawing  rooms"  on  this  occasion. 

I 


114 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


says,  "  at  table,  we  were  merry,  and  very  glad  that  all 
things  had  so  passed  to  the  great  satisfaction  of  the 
King,  and  the  honour  of  that  place." 

The  whole  entertainment,  which  had  been  given  on 
a  munificent  scale — for  Laud,  though  simple  in  his  own 
tastes,  could  cn  occasion  emulate  the  historic  grandeur 
of  the  medieval  bishops — cost  the  Archbishop  £2,G66.1 
His  careful  steward,  Adam  Torless,  remained  at  Oxford 
a  week  to  collect  the  accounts  and  pay  the  bills,  while 
Laud  himself,  with  a  retinue  of  "between  forty  end 
fifty  horse,"  returned  by  slow  stages  to  Croydon.  It 
was  the  last  time  he  was  in  Oxford,  and  the  University 
gave  fit  recognition  of  his  generosity  and  care. 

The  same  minute  care,  and  the  same  munificence, 
appear  in  his  general  treatment  of  the  University,  as 
in  his  patronage  of  his  own  college  and  of  the  Bodleian 
Library.  This  will  be  seen  from  a  brief  review  of  his 
Chancellorship. 

He  was  admitted  to  office  at  London  House  on 
April  28,  1630,  after  a  large  number  of  representatives 
of  the  University  had  assembled  in  Convocation  at 
Doctors'  Commons,  and  marched  in  procession  to  the 
bishop's  palace.  Laud's  speech,  after  taking  the  oaths, 
was  a  modest  recognition  of  inferiority  to  his  pre- 
decessors in  position,  but  clearly  expressed  his  intention 
not  to  regard  the  office  as  a  sinecure.  His  intimate 
knowledge  of  the  University  and  the  city  enabled  him 
to  do  more  for  both  than  had  been  done  for  centuries. 
Three  points  appeared  to  him  especially  to  require 
attention.     He  was  convinced   of  the  necessity  of 

1  Account  made  by  A.  Torless,  Gal.  State  Papers,  1636-7, 
p.  477.  Many  presents  were  received,  and  some  great  personages 
also  gave  contributions.  Laud  Las  added  to  the  endorsement, 
"  all  payed." 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


115 


personal  supervision  from  outside,  in  order  to  prevent 
petty  quarrels — he  saw  the  necessity  for  a  revival  of 
discipline  among  the  undergraduates,  and  a  revision  of 
the  statutes. 

From  the  first  he  required  the  Vice-Chancellor  to 
send  him  weekly  an  account  of  University  affairs,  upon 
which  he  promised  to  send  every  week  his  own  censure 
or  approbation.  He  kept  a  book,  it  is  clear,  into  which 
the  University  letters  and  his  replies  were  copied,  and 
in  which  he  noted  down  all  events  of  importance  as 
they  occurred.1  From  this  it  is  evident  that  he  had 
no  easy  post.  The  Regius  and  Margaret  Professors  of 
Divinity'2  needed  admonition  to  "read  their  lectures 
as  the  statutes  require " :  the  proctors'  authority 
required  support  even  against  the  Dean  of  Christ 
Church3  (whom  Laud  in  1639  sharply  informed  that 
he  had  "carried  this  business  like  a  sudden,  hasty, 
and  weak  man,  and  most  unlike  a  man  that  under- 
stands government ") :  Dr.  Prideaux  had  to  be  con- 
tinually rated  for  unsound  doctrine  and  ill  manners ; 
the  Westminster  supper  at  Christ  Church  on  December 
20  deserved  suppression  as  a  cause  of  disorder :  the 
cellar  of  Brasenose  required  to  be  "better  looked  to, 
that  no  strong  and  unruly  argument  be  drawn  from 
that  topic  place":  the  citizens  quarrelled  with  the 
University  about  the  night-watch — a  traditional  quarrel 

1  This  volume  appears  to  have  come,  with  other  Land  MSS., 
to  S.  John's,  and  was  lent  by  Dr.  Peter  Mews,  President 
1667 — 1673,  to  Antony  Wood,  since  which  time  it  has  not  heen 
heard  of.  See  Wood's  Athenue  Oxonievses,  vol.  iii.  p.  141.  It  was 
published  in  1700.  and  in  vol.  v.  of  his  Works,  1853. 

2  Dr.  John  Prideaux,  Reg.  Prof.  Div.  1615—1642  ;  Dr.  Samuel 
Fell,  Marg.  Prof.  1626—1638,  and  Dean  of  Ch.  Ch.  1638-1647. 

3  There  is  an  interesting  passage  in  relation  to  contested 
questions  of  University  jurisdiction  (v.  279). 


116 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


— and  the  Chancellor  must  make  peace :  the  Mitre, 
ever  a  famous  inn,  was  declared  to  be  "  the  general 
rendezvous  of  all  the  recusants,  not  in  this  shire  only, 
but  in  the  kingdom " :  and  the  Winchester  scholars 
of  New  College  required  to  be  checked  in  too  early 
reading  of  Calvin.1  In  all  these  matters  Laud  personally 
intervened,  and  he  was  no  less  interested  in  the 
regulation  of  alehouses,  the  navigation  of  the  Thames, 
the  discovery  of  recusants,  and  the  addition  of  new 
buildings  to  the  colleges.2 

To  the  Church  and  learning  he  rendered  conspicuous 
services  in  the  revival  of  the  Latin  celebration  of  the 
Holy  Communion  at  the  beginning  of  each  term  in 
the  University  church,  and  in  the  creation  of  an  Arabic 
lectureship,3  to  which  he  appointed  Mr.  Edward  Pococke, 
the  most  famous  Orientalist  of  the  day.  He  was 
especially  concerned  also  in  the  development  of  the 
"  learned  "  press,  and  it  was  through  him  that  the  prebend 
of  Christ  Church  was  annexed  to  the  chair  of  Hebrew. 
Besides  these  services,  under  his  Chancellorship,  Oxford 
was  most  immediately  affected  by  the  reinforcement  of 
discipline  and  the  revision  of  the  statutes. 

The  studies  of  the  place  could  not  be  properly  carried 
on  when  the  government  of  the  students  was  so  lax  as 
Laud  found  it.  In  1631  he  issued  orders  to  check  the 
extravagance  of  apparel,  the  "  boots  and  spurs  together 
with  their  gowns,"  which  the  young  men  affected,  and 
to  enforce  the  due  respect  of  juniors  towards  seniors. 

1  "I  have  often  wondered,"  lie  says  (v.  116),  "why  so  many 
good  scholars  came  from  Winchester  to  New  College,  and  yet  so 
few  of  them  afterwards  prove  eminent  men." 

2  He  notes  the  new  building  of  the  west  side  of  University 
College  in  1634. 

3  Now  the  Laudian  Professorship  of  Arabic. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


117 


The  statutes  were  to  be  put  in  force  "  for  haunting  of 
inns  or  taverns,  especially  of  masters  of  arts,  that  should 
give  younger  youths  better  example."    The  next  year 
similar  injunctions  were  issued,  that  the  heads  of  col- 
leges should  see  that  the  youth  conform  themselves  to 
the  public  discipline  of  the  University.    "  And  par- 
ticularly I  pray,  see  that  none,  youth  or  other,  be  suf- 
fered to  go  in  boots  or  spurs,  or  to  wear  their  hair 
undecently  long,  or  with  a  lock  in  the  present  fashion, 
or  with  slashed  doublets,  or  in  any  light  or  garish 
colours."    Laud's  intimate  knowledge  of  the  University 
had  given  him  a  scheme  for  its  improvement  as  well 
as  the  understanding  of  its  disciplinary  defects.  He 
desired  especially  to  make  the  power  of  the  Chan- 
cellor more  real,  and  secondly,  to  exercise  that  power, 
through  the  heads  of  houses,  over  all  members  of  the 
University.    His  idea  of  his  own  function  made  the 
Chancellor  in  Oxford  something  of  what  the  Lord 
Mayor  was  in  London ;  and  as  the  guilds  and  com- 
panies were  amenable   through    their   masters  and 
wardens,  so  were  the  graduates  and  undergraduates 
through  the  body  of  heads.    Tact  and  a  strong  hand 
soon  re-establish  discipline :  and  by  1636,  Mr.  Secretary 
Coke  could  congratulate  the  students  on  the  revival  of 
studious  manners,  and  states  that  the  University  in 
this  matter,  "which  before  had  no  paragon  in  any 
foreign  country,"  had  now  "  gone  beyond  itself." 

Of  more  permanent  importance  even  than  the  re- 
assertion  of  authority  was  the  codification  of  statutes 
which  was  the  great  work  of  Laud's  Chancellorship.  In 
University  law  he  found  confusion  worse  confounded. 
Twice  during  his  residence  it  had  been  attempted  to 
bring  into  order  the  multitudinous  and  contradictory 


118 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


rules  by  which  the  University  was  governed  almost  at 
haphazard.  He  had  himself  been  on  a  delegacy  ap- 
pointed to  deal  with  the  matter,  and  when  he  became 
Chancellor  he  took  up  the  question  with  spirit.  A 
delegacy  was  again  appointed,  and  by  1633  it  reported 
that  its  work  was  done.  On  August  20  the  draft 
was  submitted  to  the  Chancellor.  He  undertook  a 
careful  revision  of  the  whole,  and  issued  the  result  on 
July  18,  1634-,  enjoining  that  the  statutes  should  be 
observed  for  a  year,  and  at  the  end  of  that  time  be 
published  with  any  alterations  that  in  the  meantime 
might  appear  to  be  necessary.1 

The  Laudian  Code,  as  it  came  to  bs  called,  marked 
an  epoch  in  University  law.  The  casual  and  tempo- 
rary orders  of  the  Middle  Age  and  of  the  Revival  of 
Learning  had  lain  down  together  in  poor  harmony.  It 
was  possible  for  a  pedantic  student  or  an  ill-disposed 
agitator  to  delay  business  and  reduce  government  to 
an  absurdity.  Convocation  was  constantly  called  to- 
gether, and  the  "  whole  Universitv  "  was  troubled  "  for 
every  boy's  business."  Laud  introduced  system  and 
coherence.  He  gave  the  government  to  a  Board  of 
Heads,  who  should  meet  weekly  to  "  consider  of  the 
peace  and  government  of  the  University  as  occasion  may 
arise."  He  substituted  for  the  unsatisfactory  method 
of  choosing  proctors  by  general  election  a  choice  by 
the  colleges  according  to  a  definite  cycle.  It  was  under 
his  direction  also  that  examinations  were  instituted, 
"including  far  more  subjects  than  are  now  required  of 
passmen."  2  Throughout,  he  defined  rights  and  regu- 
lated duties.    The  Laudian  Code  remained  in  force 

1  See  the  Laudian  Statutes,  ed.  Griffith  and  Shadwell,  1888. 

2  Brodrick,  Memorials  of  Morton  College,  p.  77,  note. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


119 


with  but  slight  changes  till  the  modern  era  of  legis- 
lation set  in,  and  even  now  in  matters  of  ceremonial 
and  of  discipline  it  forms  the  basis  of  University  rule. 
There  is  no  need  to  exaggerate  Laud's  personal  in- 
fluence on  the  codification.  He  knew  what  it  was 
necessary  to  do ;  he  employed  capable  agents,  and  he 
supervised  their  work  when  it  was  accomplished.  The 
result  bore  markedly  the  impress  of  his  mind.  But 
he  did  not,  in  any  general  sense,  create  or  originate ; 
his  wisdom  lay  rather  in  the  adaptation  and  in  the 
intention.  Nevertheless,  his  work  was  one  of  the  most 
valuable  and  the  most  permanent  that  the  University 
has  known.  He  was  a  genuine  University  reformer, 
and  in  that  aspect  of  his  life  he  might  be  content  to 
go  down  to  posterity  with  his  code  in  his  hand. 

Apart  from  his  position  as  Chancellor,  Laud  exercised 
considerable  control  over  several  of  the  colleges  in  the 
capacity  of  visitor.  The  most  famous  instance  of  the 
use  of  these  powers  was  in  the  case  of  Merton  College, 
where  the  statutes  were  by  no  means  scrupulously 
obeyed,  and  where  Laud  determined  to  enforce  a  "  godly 
and  thorough  reformation."  The  ordinances  issued  as 
the  result  of  his  visitation  were  extremely  strict  and 
entered  into  every  aspect  of  college  life.  Sir  Nathaniel 
Brent,  the  warden,  accepted  them  with  apparent  sub- 
mission, but  it  is  clear  that  the  college  as  a  whole 
preferred  to  govern  itself,  however  laxly,  for  it  regarded 
the  ArchbishoiD's  action  as  "  the  most  unjust  of  visitations 
and  worse  than  the  worst  of  all."1 

It  is  characteristic  of  the  man,  that  he  was  not 
satisfied  with  the  rapprochement  which  his  individual 
knowledge  and  affection  might  bring  about  between  the 
1  See  Brodrick's  Memorials  of  Merton  College. 


120 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Church  and  the  Universities.  He  sought  to  make 
permanent  and  inalienable  the  right  of  the  Church  to 
supervise  the  higher  education  of  the  nation.  He  saw 
in  the  vague  power  with  which  law  and  custom  had 
endowed  the  see  of  Canterbury  a  means  of  exercising 
a  lawful  and  extensive  control.  He  therefore  claimed 
the  right  to  visit  the  Universities  as  inherent  in  the 
metropolitanate.  He  claimed  the  right  as  ecclesiastical 
not  academic,  and  intended  in  no  way  to  interfere  with 
the  statutes.1  He  collected  evidence,  papers,  decrees, 
precedents,  in  favour  of  his  claim.  The  Universities 
also  stated  their  case,2  as  did  certain  colleges  with 
regard  to  separate  foundations,  and  a  decision  was 
finally  given  by  the  King  in  Council,  June  21,  1636. 
"  After  a  statement  of  the  case,  and  of  the  principal 
objections  with  the  counter-evidence  in  support  of  the 
asserted  right,  his  Majesty  adjudged  the  right  of  visit- 
ing both  the  Universities  to  belong  to  the  archbishops 
and  metropolitical  Church  of  Canterbury,  and  that 
the  Universities  should  be  from  time  to  time  obedient 
thereunto."  The  right  thus  asserted  was  never  exer- 
cised. "  My  troubles  began  to  be  foreseen  by  me,  and 
I  visited  them  not,"  said  Laud  at  his  trial,  when  the 
claim  was  made  the  matter  of  a  formal  charge  against 

O  O 

him.3 

His  relations  with  the  Universities — and  the  history 
of  his  Chancellorship  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,4  is  as 
valuable  an  illustration  of  his  aims  as  any  branch  of  his 

1  See  letter  of  Dr.  Chr.  Potter,  Cal.  State  Papers,  June  24, 
1035. 

2  Oxford  made  no  general  opposition  ;  for  the  case  of  Cambridge, 
see  Laud's  Works,  v.  555  sqq. 

3  Works,  iv.  193. 

4  See  p.  166  sqq. 


LAUD  AND  THE  CHURCH 


121 


English  work — must  be  regarded  as  one  aspect,  and 
that  to  him  a  very  important  one,  of  his  rights  and 
duties  with  regard  to  the  Church  at  large.  True 
religion  and  sound  learning  ever  stood  together  in  his 
thoughts  as  they  stood  in  the  Bidding  Prayer  of  his 
own  University.  It  was  his  aim  to  knit  them  still 
more  firmly,  and  to  encourage  the  progress  of  learning 
by  the  aid  of  the  moral  principles  which  it  belonged 
to  religion  to  instil.  All  intellectual  progress  requires 
training  and  submission  to  rule,  but  opinion  was  to 
be  shackled  as  little  as  possible  by  minute  dogmatic 
regulations.  What  Church  and  State  had  decided  and 
declared  must  of  course  be  observed  :  but  it  had  been 
their  wisdom  but  rarely  to  descend  into  particulars. 
As  for  the  Universities,  so  for  the  Church  at  large, 
obedience  and  freedom  did  not  seem  to  Laud  to  be 
incompatible.  That  union,  rejected  though  it  might  be 
for  the  time,  was  yet  imperatively  demanded  by  Church 
and  State  alike.  And  so  it  was  that  "  his  nobler  aims 
were  too  much  in  accordance  with  the  needs  of  his 
age  to  be  altogether  baffled."  It  may  be  "  little  that 
every  parish  church  in  the  land  still — two  centuries  and 
a  half  after  the  years  in  which  he  was  at  the  height  of 
power — presents  a  spectacle  which  realizes  his  hopes; 
it  is  far  more  that  his  refusal  to  submit  his  mind  to  the 
dogmatism  of  Puritanism,  and  his  appeal  to  the  culti- 
vated intelligence  for  the  solution  of  religious  problems, 
has  received  an  ever-increasing  response,  even  in  regions 
in  which  his  memory  is  devoted  to  contemptuous 
obloquy." 1  It  is  in  this  that  Laud's  claim  to  be  a 
far-sighted  statesman  may  be  justified.  Narrow  though 
his  outlook  may  appear  to  have  been,  he  was  in  reality 
*  Gardiner,  Hist,  of  Great  Civil  War,  vol.  ii.  p.  108. 


122 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


builder,  like  all  the  true  artificers  of  the  Church,  for 
futurity.  Thus,  through  his  love  of  order  and  his  love 
of  learning,  no  less  than  by  his  energy  and  his  tolerance, 
he  did  for  the  Church  of  England  a  work  which  no 
other  man  since  the  Reformation  has  been  able  to 
achieve. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


LAUD  AND  THE  STATE. 

Laud,  by  the  necessities  of  the  time  more  than  by 
his  own  wish,  was  a  statesman  as  well  as  an  ecclesiastic. 
It  is  true  that  he  saw  no  objection  to  the  employment 
of  priests  in  secular  office  :  rather  he  considered  that 
they  could  do  work,  in  their  single-minded  devotion  to 
duty  and  absence  of  family  interest,  which  the  poli- 
ticians of  the  time  but  rarely  accomplished.  But  it 
was  not  to  him  an  ideal  arrangement.  When  he 
secured  the  elevation  of  Juxon  to  be  Lord  Treasurer, 
he  had  satisfied  himself  of  the  fitness  of  the  appoint- 
ment, not  only  by  a  careful  search  for  precedents,  but 
by  an  examination  of  the  merits  of  other  possible 
candidates.  He  had  himself  worked  at  the  Treasury, 
and  had  seen  the  difficulties  of  its  management  and 
the  need  of  the  strictest  probity.  "  He  had  observed," 
says  Heylin,  "  that  divers  Treasurers  of  late  years  had 
raised  themselves  from  very  mean  and  private  fortunes 
to  the  titles  and  estates  of  earls,  which  he  conceived 
could  not  be  without  wrong  to  both  King  and  subjects, 
and  therefore  he  resolved  to  commend  such  a  man  to 


124 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


his  Majesty  for  the  next  Lord  Treasurer,  who,  having 
no  family  to  raise,  no  wife  and  children  to  provide  for, 
might  better  manage  the  incomes  of  the  Treasury  to 
the  King's  advantage  than  they  had  been  formerly." 

Some  benefit  he  looked  for  to  the  Church  from  the 
arrangement.  "  No  churchman  had  it  since  Henry 
VII.'s  time.  I  pray  God  bless  him  to  carry  it  so  that 
the  Church  may  have  honour,  and  the  King  and  the 
State  service  and  contentment  by  it.  And  now,  if  the 
Church  will  not  hold  themselves  up  under  God,  I  can 
do  no  more,"  he  wrote  in  his  Diary  on  March  6,  163G ; 
and  he  made  no  further  attempts  to  place  Churchmen 
in  State  office.  As  Primate,  he  was  himself,  according 
to  ancient  usage,  the  first  constitutional  adviser  of 
the  Crown,  and  that  his  interference  in  the  affairs  of 
government  should  be  sought  by  Charles  was  not  un- 
natural. But  before  this  date  he  was  already,  through 
Buckingham's  influence,  engaged  in  secular  work.  If 
we  enumerate  the  secular  employments  in  which  he 
was  at  any  time  engaged,  we  find  that  he  was  a  privy 
councillor,  and  sat  on  the  High  Commission  and  in 
the  Star  Chamber ;  he  was  on  the  Commissions  of  the 
Treasury  and  of  the  Admiralty ;  he  was  on  the  Foreign 
Committee  and  the  Committee  of  Trade.  His  capacity 
for  hard  work  and  his  utter  absence  of  all  self-seeking, 
made  the  King,  who  came  gradually  to  rely  greatly  upon 
his  advice,  naturally  put  him  wherever  he  might  be 
useful. 

Like  all  men  who  are  set  to  work  for  which  they 
have  no  special  aptitude  or  training,  he  was  by  no 
means  always  wise  or  successful  in  affairs  of  State. 
He  imparted  a  new  spirit  to  the  Treasury  by  his  keen 
search  into  abuses  and   his  complete  freedom  from 


LAUD  AND  THE  STATE 


125 


selfish  aims.  But,  to  take  one  instance,  his  treatment 
of  the  questions  involved  in  the  soap  monopoly  was 
injudicious  though  well-meaning;  and  the  quarrel  with 
Cottington  and  Windebanke,  which  followed,  seriously 
increased  the  difficulties  of  his  own  position.  It  was 
an  advantage  to  have  an  honest  man  in  office,  but  it 
was  a  misfortune  to  give  authority  in  business  matters 
to  one  who  was  in  no  way  a  financier.  Laud  chafed 
against  "  my  lady  Mora,"  the  curse  of  the  Avhole 
administration  :  he  threw  himself  headlong  into  the 
struggle  against  corrupt  and  dishonest  advisers  :  but 
he  was  unfit  for  the  work,  and  he  could  do  little 
at  it.1 

His  practical  work,  however,  it  may  be  said,  was  less 
important  than  his  political  theory.  It  was  Laud, 
above  all  men,  it  has  often  been  asserted,  who  threw 
the  weight  of  the  Church  on  to  the  side  of  absolutism 
in  the  great  struggle.  In  a  sense  this  is  true,  but  it 
is  true  to  a  much  more  limited  extent  than  has  been 
generally  believed.  Laud  was  an  Aristotelian.2  He 
looked  at  government  from  a  practical  standpoint,  and, 
like  Hooker,  took  much  of  his  political  principles  from 
the  Ethics  and  the  Politics.  He  had  certainly  no  idea 
of  advising  a  policy  that  was  contrary  to  law.  "  I 
learned  so  much  long  ago  out  of  Aristotle,"  he  said  at 
his  trial,  "  and  his  reasons  are  too  good  to  be  gone 
against."    Thus  the  benefit  of  the  governed  was  the 

1  This  is  not  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Simpkinson,  Life  of  Lu  nd,  who 
dwells  upon  Laud's  political  activity,  his  work  at  the  Treasury 
and  the  Admiralty,  and  his  preparations  for  the  Scots  war.  I  do 
not  think,  however,  that  the  authorities  warrant  our  ascribing  so 
much  to  the  Archbishop's  individual  action. 

2  He  constantly  quotes  Aristotle,  whom  he  calls  his  "  old 
master  "  at  his  trial. 


126 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


thought  which  underlay  all  his  statements  of  political 
doctrine.  He  had  no  taste  for  abstract  speculation, 
least  of  all  in  politics.  The  doctrine  of  the  Divine 
right  of  kings,  as  Mr.  Gardiner  says,  never  assumed 
prominence  in  his  mind.  He  thought,  like  so  many 
sober  students  of  the  time,  that  government  needed  a 
firmer  base  than  the  will  of  a  fickle  and  half-educated 
people,  and  he  accepted  the  theory  which  Anglican 
controversialists  had  found  so  valuable  an  ally  in  their 
resistance  to  papal  claims.  Thus  the  expression  of  the 
canons  of  1640  follows  the  lines  of  Bodin,  whom  Laud 
himself  on  several  occasions  quotes  as  an  authority,  as 
well  as  of  Hooker.  "  The  most  high  and  sacred  order 
of  kings  is  of  Divine  right,  being  the  ordinance  of  God 
Himself,  founded  in  the  prime  laws  of  nature,  and 
clearly  established  by  express  texts  both  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments." 

The  regal  authority  is  recognized  as  supreme,  and 
the  definition  of  the  supremacy  is  a  definite  approach 
to  the  formal  statement  of  the  doctrine  of  sovereignty, 
as  later  developed  by  Hobbes.  "  For  any  person  to 
set  up,  maintain,  or  avow  ....  any  independent 
co-active  power,  either  papal  or  popular  ....  is  to 
undermine  their  great  royal  office."  Behind  the  King 
lies  the  divine  sanction.  Thus,  bearing  arms  against 
the  sovereign  is  declared  to  be  to  resist  the  ordinance 
of  God.  "  Bodin,"  as  Laud  said  at  his  trial,  "  is  clear 
that  arms  may  not  be  taken  up  against  the  prince,  be 
he  never  so  impious  and  wicked,  and  instances  in  Saul 
and  Nebuchadnezzar." 

In  all  this  Laud  certainly  never  dreamed  that  he  was 
passing  beyond  existing  law  and  custom.  He  was 
fortified  by  legal  decisions  at  every  point  of  dispute. 


LAUD  AND  THE  STATE 


127 


And  when  a  rash  preacher  like  Man  waring 1  went 
beyond  what  seemed  to  him  just,  he  protested  against 
the  publication  of  his  sermon.  "  I  have,  since  I  came 
into  place,  made  stay  of  divers  books,  purposely  written 
to  maintain  '  an  absolute  power '  in  the  kingdom,  and 
have  not  suffered  them  to  be  printed,  as  were  earnestly 
desired,"  he  said  at  his  trial.  He  declared  to  the  last 
that  he  had  never  favoured  arbitrary  government.  The 
law  might  be  sharply  or  lightly  carried  out,  but  it  should 
never  be  exceeded.  And  this,  he  declared,  "  I  learned 
of  a  very  wise  and  able  governor  ....  Henry  VII.,  of 
whom  the  story  says  that  in  the  difficulties  of  his  time 
and  cause,  he  used  both  ways  of  government,  severity 
and  clemency,  yet  both  these  were  still  within  the  com- 
pass of  the  law.  He  was  far  too  wise,  and  I  never  yet 
such  a  fool,  as  to  embrace  arbitrary  government." 

The  critical  question  of  taxation  is  avoided  in  the 
canons  of  1640  by  an  assertion  of  the  royal  right  to 
supplies,  coupled  with  a  declaration  of  the  subject's 
right  to  his  own  property.  And  Laud  in  his  appeals 
to  individuals  and  to  the  nation  in  the  matter  of  ship- 
money  relied  solely  on  the  judge's  decision.  As  in 
Church,  so  in  State,  a  decision  of  the  constituted 
authority  was  to  him  final.  "  I  for  my  part  could  not 
conceive  that  the  judges  would  put  that  under  their 
hands  to  be  law  which  should  after  be  found  unlawful." 
He  made  indeed  a  special  search  for  precedents  in  the 
matter  of  parliamentary  grants,  as  may  be  seen  in  a  list 

1  I  venture  to  think  that  Mr.  Gardiner  (vi.  208)  exaggerates 
Manwaring's  teaching.  He  did  not  assert  that  "eternal  damna- 
tion "  would  be  the  lot  of  those  who  did  not  obey  the  King.  He 
used  the  term  "damnation''  simply  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is 
used  in  the  Authorized  Version  in  the  passage  referred  to. 


128 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


of  Parliaments  on  which  he  has  noted  the  gifts  and 
subsidies  on  each  occasion. 1 

Thus  his  sermons  appeal  to  the  existing  constitution 
as  the  ground  for  generosity  and  for  unity  on  the  part 
of  Parliament.  States  have  their  solidity  only  in  the 
unity  of  those  who  compose  them — it  is  his  constant 
appeal,  and  an  appeal  which  illustrates  the  scope  of  his 
political  vision.  He  was  content  to  take  the  constitu- 
tion as  he  found  it,  and  to  accept  for  fundamental  bases 
of  the  State  all  the  powers  that  the  despotic  Tudors 
had  exercised.  He  did  not  deny  the  competence  of 
other  forms  of  government — but  the  monarchical  was 
to  him  at  once  the  best  and  for  England  the  per- 
manent. 

"  I  have  no  will  to  except  against  any  form  of  govern- 
ment, assumed  by  any  state  ;  yet  this  my  text  bids  me 
say  for  the  honour  of  monarchical  government,  the 
'  seats  of  judgment '  in  it  are  permanent ;  and  I  do 
not  remember  that  ever  I  read  'seats  of  judgment 1  so 
fixed  as  under  regal  power.  I  do  not  by  this  deny  but 
that  there  may  be  the  city  in  peace  and  administra- 
tion of  justice  in  other  forms  of  government,  some- 
times as  much,  sometimes  more ;  but  these  are  judicia 
not  scdcs,  'judgment'  not  'seats,'  of  it.  And  justice 
there  may  be ;  but  it  continues  not  half  so  steady. 
The  factions  of  an  aristocracy,  how  often  have  they 
divided  the  city  into  civil  wars,  and  made  that  city 
which  was 'at  unity  in  itself  wade  in  her  own  blood! 
And  for  a  democracy,  or  popular  government,  Jtudus 
popiiU  fluctus  maris,  the  waves  and  gulfs  of  both  are 
alike.    None  but  God  can  1  rule  the  raging  of  the  sea 

1  Gal.  State  Papers,  March  17,  1628.  Part  of  it  is  printed  in  Iris 
Works,  vii.  (527  sqq. 


LAUD  AND  THE  STATE 


129 


and  the  madness  of  the  people.'  And  no  safety  or 
settledness  till  there  be  a  return  in  domum  David,  to 
a  monarchy  and  a  King  again."  1 

The  King  as  a  settled  foundation,  and  "  you  are  a 
noble  and  most  loyal  people " — such  are  his  funda- 
mental conceptions.  They  belong  to  the  England  of 
Elizabeth,  to  the  romantic,  extravagant  veneration  in 
which  the  woman  and  the  Queen,  the  person  and  the 
State,  were  confused.  They  sound  antiquated  and 
irrelevant  in  the  England  of  the  Stewarts.  And  yet, 
out  of  date  as  was  the  entire  personal  devotion  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  it  was  this — to  which  Laud  appealed, 
and  which  seemed  to  him  to  be  a  beautiful  and  natural 
feature  of  human  society, — which  under  the  influence  of 
the  Church  gave  Charles  the  party  that  fought  so 
gallantly  for  his  cause.  Old-fashioned  loyalties  have  a 
power  which  the  world  can  ill  afford  to  lack  :  and  these 
it  was  the  work  of  Laud  and  the  Churchmen  of  his  day 
to  foster  and  preserve.  The  strength  of  the  Crown  lay 
largely  in  that  union  between  Church  and  State  which 
Laud  believed  to  be  indispensable.  Church  and  State 
stand  and  fall  together — it  is  his  constant  teaching. 
"  The  Church  cannot  dwell  but  in  the  State  "  :  "  and 
the  Commonwealth  cannot  flourish  without  the  Church." 
And  though  he  follows  Aristotle  as  to  the  origin  of  the 
State,  he  denies  the  possibility  of  the  existence  of  the 
State  in  its  perfection  without  the  Church  to  make  it 
"  blessed  and  happy."  And  by  the  Church  he  definitely 
meant  the  Church  as  organized  upon  the  Apostolic 
model.  This  Catholic  Church  it  was  which  was  in- 
separably bound  to  solid  government,  and  above  all  to 

1  Sermon  before  King  Charles's  second  Parliament,  Works, 
i.  85. 

K 


130 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


monarchy.  "  They,  whoever  they  be,  that  would  over- 
throw scdcs  ccclcsiae,  the  'seats  of  ecclesiastical  govern- 
ment,' will  not  spare,  if  ever  they  get  power,  to  have  a 
pluck  at  '  the  throne  of  David.'  And  there  is  not  a 
man  that  is  for  '  parity ' — all  fellows  in  the  Church — 
but  he  is  not  for  monarchy  in  the  State."  Laud  saw 
quite  as  clearly  as  James  L  that  "  no  bishop  "  involved 
"no  king." 

And  yet,  though  it  lay  at  the  very  root  of  his  political 
creed  to  accept  the  constitution  as  he  found  it,  and 
to  serve  the  monarch  with  unreserved  loyalty  and 
devotion,  neither  theory  nor  practice  made  him  blind  to 
the  defects  of  government  or  the  personal  weaknesses 
of  the  King.  "  The  secret  lets  and  difficulties  in  public 
proceedings,"  he  said,  following  Hooker,  "and  in  the 
managing  of  great  State  affairs,  are  both  '  innumerable 
and  inevitable  ' ;  and  this  every  discreet  man  should 
consider."  And  of  Charles  his  deliberate  judgment — 
forced  on  him,  it  is  true,  after  years  of  bitter  disappoint- 
ment and  tragic  experience — remains,  "  a  mild  and 
gracious  prince  who  knew  not  how  to  be  or  to  be  made 
great."  Something  of  this  feeling,  perhaps,  urged  him 
earlier,  when  he  begged  the  people  to  pray  for  the  King,1 
for  men  do  not  readily  revile  and  murmur  against  one 
whom  they  earnestly  remember  before  God. 

Such  was  Laud's  attitude  towards  the  Crown.  It 
did  not  involve  such  disparagement  of  Parliaments  as 
the  more  violent  Monarchists  found  ready  to  their 
hands,  or  such  exaltation  of  the  royal  authority.  The 
charge  against  him  of  altering  the  Coronation  oath 
entirely  broke  down  at  the  trial,  and  was  abandoned 
by  Prynne  himself,  who  had  garbled  the  Diary  in  order 
1  Works,  i.  191. 


LAUD  AND  THE  STATE 


131 


to  find  a  basis  for  it.  The  oath  which  Charles  took 
was  the  same  as  that  taken  by  his  father.1  Laud  was 
the  last  man  in  the  world  to  alter  custom  on  such  a 
point  and  at  such  a  time.  And  he  fully  admitted  the 
place  of  Parliament  in  the  Constitution,  though  it  would 
be  bard  to  discover  to  what  extent  he  recognized  or 
limited  its  powers.  He  supported  Strafford  in  his  advice 
to  summon  the  House  in  December  1639.  "  Parlia- 
ments are  the  best  preservers  of  the  ancient  laws  and 
rights  of  this  kingdom,"  he  said,  "  but  I  think  this  too, 
that  corruptio  optimi  est  pessimal' 2  "  If  the  Parliament 
should  prove  peevish "  was  an  expression  in  his  Diary 
to  which  exception  was  taken :  but  at  most  this  was 
but  to  deny  that  all  Parliaments  must  be  impeccable — 
and  some,  as  he  said,  had  been  called  "  unlearned  "  or 
"  mad."  As  Parliament  had  been  under  Elizabeth,  so 
he  conceived  it  should  be  now.  Mr.  Peter  Wentworth 
was  a  happy  instance  of  how  Parliamentary  inquisitive- 
ness  should  be  treated.  "  King  Charles  had  as  good 
right,  and  with  as  little  breach  of  Parliament  privilege, 
to  demand  the  six  men  which  by  his  Attorney  he  had 
accused  of  treason,  as  that  great  Queen  had  to  lay  hold 
on  Mr.  Wentworth."  3 

That  Laud  was  not  more  definite  in  laying  down 
limits  to  the  powers  of  Parliament  was  certainly  due  to 
no  lack  in  him  of  the  courage  of  his  opinions.  Where 
he  was  clear  as  to  constitutional  right,  he  did  not  hesitate 
to  speak  boldly.  "  They  say,"  he  answered  at  his  trial, 
when  he  well  knew  that  the  Scots  were  thirsting  for  his 

1  See  Prynne's  Breviate,  p.  7  ;  cf.  Canterburie's  Doorne,  pp.  69 
and  475.  The  whole  question  is  exhaustively  argued  by  the  Rev. 
Chr.  Wordsworth  in  his  introduction  to  the  Coronation  Book  of 
Charles  I.  (Henry  Bradshaw  Society). 

2  Works,  iii.  433.  3  Ibid.,  vi.  231. 


132 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


blood,  and  that  his  enemies  in  Parliament  were  their 
pledged  allies,  "that  I  did  openly  and  often  speak  of 
them  as  of  rebels  and  traitors.  That  indeed  is  true  ;  I 
did  so :  and  I  spake  as  I  then  thought  and  as  I  think 
still  "  :  and  of  the  Covenant,  "  if  I  did  say  it  was  '  un- 
godly, damnable,  and  treasonable,'  I  said  no  more  than 
it  deserved."  1  Rebellion  he  again  and  again  asserted 
was  wholly  unlawful.  To  take  arms  against  the 
sovereign  was  condemned  by  God  and  by  history :  and 
the  differences  of  the  Scots  had  better  been  settled  by 
ink  than  by  blood. 

Laud,  then,  occupies  in  politics  a  position  not  unlike 
that  he  holds  in  theology.  He  abhorred  too  rigid 
definition.  He  would  not  state  what  might  be,  hypo- 
thetically,  the  powers  of  King  or  of  Parliament.  He 
would  draw  no  line  between  them.  He  would  impose 
no  "  particular "  articles  of  political  belief.  But  what 
had  been  decreed,  what  had  been  customary,  what  had 
behind  it  the  forces  of  precedent  and  of  law,  biblical 
warrant,  or  the  judges'  decision — to  that  he  adhered, 
and  outside  that  he  would  not,  if  he  might,  allow  others 
to  stray. 

But  Laud's  practical  conduct  of  affairs  of  State  is  of 
more  interest  than  his  theory,  and  most  interesting  of 
all  is  his  conduct  in  the  Star  Chamber.  Here  more 
than  elsewhere,  perhaps,  he  has  suffered  from  the  ignorant 
violence  of  partisan  historians.  The  Star  Chamber,  it 
should  not  be  necessary  to  repeat,  was  a  lay  court,  and 
Laud  was  but  one,  and  scarcely  the  most  prominent, 
of  its  many  members.  The  offences  of  which  it  took 
cognizance  were  offences  against  the  State,  not  the 
Church,  and  the  law  upon  which  its  decisions  were 
}  Works,  iii.  361,  362. 


LAUD  AND  THE  STATE 


133 


based  was  not  the  Canonical  but  the  Common  Law. 
Libel,  perjury,  fraud,  riot,  were  more  prominent  among 
the  charges  brought  before  it  than  political  offences.  It 
was  a  legal  court,  contrary  though  it  was  to  the  true 
principles  of  the  English  Constitution ;  and  Laud  took 
it,  as  he  found  it,  as  part  of  the  settled  system  under 
which  it  was  his  lot  to  live,  and  sat  among  its  members 
as  one  of  the  ordiuary  duties  which  it  fell  to  him  to 
perform.  Nothing  was  further  from  his  mind  than  to 
play  the  tyrant  or  the  bigot.  He  sat  in  the  Star 
Chamber  with  as  clear  a  conscience  and  as  single  an 
aim  as  those  with  which  many  clerks  have  sat  in 
modern  times  on  the  bench  of  the  Petty  Sessions. 

There  are  three  great  Star  Chamber  cases  which  are 
especially  associated  with  the  name  of  Laud,  those  of 
Prynne,  Burton,  and  Bastwick.  These  it  may  be  well 
to  examine  as  examples  of  the  part  which  the  Arch- 
bishop took  in  the  proceedings  of  the  court. 

Prynne  was  a  learned  lawyer  with  a  taste  for 
lampoons.  In  1G32  his  Histriomastix  had,  with  coarse 
violence,  reviled  the  acting  and  the  dancing  in  which  it 
was  known  that  the  Queen  had  shared,  and  had  used  the 
foulest  words  of  all  women  who  played  a  mimic  part. 
He  had  declared  that  the  murder  of  Nero  was  a  justifi- 
able execution  because  he  frequented  stage-plays;  and 
in  theatres  Charles  was  known  to  take  delight.  Plays, 
Prynne  declared,  were  altogether  abominable,  and  those 
that  beheld  them  were  like  devils  incarnate.  "That 
which  hath  birth  from  the  devil  is  sin;  and  stage-plays 
have  their  birth  from  the  devil,  therefore  stage-plays  are 
sinful."  It  is  doubtful  if  in  any  age  the  book  would 
have  been  allowed  to  pass  without  prosecution.  As  it 
was,  for  his  accusations  against  the  Queen  and  his  far 


134 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


from  obscure  threat  against  the  King,  the  Star  Chamber 
fined  him  £5000,  ordered  him  to  be  imprisoned 
during  the  King's  pleasure,  and  degraded  from  his  pro- 
fession and  his  membership  of  Lincoln's  Inn  and 
Oxford,  and  finally  to  be  set  in  the  pillory  and  lose 
both  his  ears.  The  notes  of  Laud's  speech  show  clearly 
the  aspect  in  which  the  case  appeared  to  him.  He 
could  have  condemned  but  lightly  the  vulgar  railing 
against  the  stage — "  a  thing  indifferent " — but  the 
references  to  the  King  and  Queen  were  indubitable. 
"  For  Mr.  Prynue,"  he  said,  "  I  am  heartily  sorry  for 
him;  for  indeed  I  hold  him  guilty  of  high  treason  by 
the  Act  of  Edward  III."  For  high  treason  the  punish- 
ment awarded,  severe  though  it  was  in  itself,  was 
moderate.  Laud  took  no  further  part  in  the  affair  than 
by  seeing  that  the  University  of  Oxford  performed  its 
part  of  the  censure. 

The  cruel  sentence  was  not  fully  carried  out : 
Prynne's  ears  were  but  touched,  not  shorn ;  and  when 
he  a  few  days  later  wrote  a  "  very  libellous  letter " 
to  Laud,  for  which  Noy  in  the  Star  Chamber  demanded 
that  he  should  be  forbade  pen  and  ink  and  shut  up 
from  church,  Laud,  with  the  instincts  of  a  Christian 
and  a  scholar,  would  not  hear  of  it ;  and  insisted 
further  that  his  books  should  be  returned  to  him. 
"  I  forgave  him,"  he  wrote  in  his  Diary.  Prynne  was 
not  a  man  to  make  a  martyr  of;  he  "never  handled 
any  argument,"  says  Mr.  Gardiner,  "  without  making 
it  repulsive  to  those  whom  he  sought  to  profit."  If 
Milton  could  write  masques  and  the  Queen  could  act  in 
them,  it  was  not  likely  that  men  would  believe  in  their 
wholesale  immorality. 

But  Prynne  was  not  silenced.     Three  years  later 


LAUD  AND  THE  STATE 


135 


he  appeared  again  before  the  Star  Chamber  with  a 
minister,  Henry  Burton,  and  a  physician,  John  Bast- 
wick.  The  edge  of  Burton's  bitter  wit  was  sharpened 
by  his  personal  rancour.  He  had  been  Charles's  Clerk 
of  the  Closet  when  he  ,was  Prince  of  Wales,  and  had 
never  forgiven  those  whom  he  believed  to  have  urged 
the  King  not  to  retain  him  when  he  came  to  the 
throne.  He  had  now  published  two  sermons,  in  which 
he  savagely  attacked  the  position  of  the  altars,  the 
bowing  towards  them,  and  the  placing  upon  them  of 
the  Cross.  Bastwick  was  famous  for  his  ribald  "Litany," 
in  which  he  charged  the  bishops  with  being  the  fathers 
of  "  ungodliness  and  unrighteousness,  impiety  and  all 
manner  of  licentiousness,"  and  declared  that  the  wicked- 
ness of  even  one  of  their  courts  was  enousrh  to  "  briny 
down  a  continual  and  perpetual  plague  upon  the  King's 
three  dominions."  The  Litany  fervently  besought  "  From 
plague,  pestilence  and  famine,  from  bishops,  priests  and 
deacons,  Good  Lord,  deliver  us."  Prynne  was  a  more 
categorical  accuser.  In  his  "  News  from  Ipswich  "  he 
launched  out  into  vehement  denunciation  of  every 
change,  petty  or  great,  that  his  ingenuity  could  dis- 
cover. That  the  public  fast  had  been  enjoined  on  a 
Wednesday,  that  Elizabeth  of  Bohemia  was  no  longer 
prayed  for  by  name,  were  proofs  of  popery  which  stood 
side  by  side  with  the  altars,  the  "  duckings  and  cring- 
ings," and  the  public  teaching  of  the  school  of  Laud. 

The  three  agreed  in  explicit  condemnation  of  every 
change  in  the  direction  of  reverence  that  had  been 
introduced  into  the  churches  and  the  worship  of 
England,  and  they  coupled  their  condemnation  of  the 
acts  with  no  obscure  attacks  upon  the  persons  con- 
cerned.   The  case  appeared  to  be  so  prominent  that 


136 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Laud  thought  it  well  to  answer  the  charges  in  detail  in 
the  Star  Chamber.  He  entered  into  a  clear  and  well- 
considered  defence  of  the  orders  that  had  been  issued 
in  matters  of  ceremonial.  He  defended  the  bowings  to- 
wards the  altar,  quoting  the  order  of  Henry  V.,  "  a  prince 
then  grown  as  religious  as  he  was  before  victorious/'  to 
the  Knights  of  the  Garter,  not  as  the  full  explanation 
of  the  practice,  but  as  a  justification  of  its  innocence. 
He  defended  the  position  of  the  altar,  and  condemned, 
not  without  a  spice  of  irony  as  sharp  as  his  censure,  the 
book  which  Williams  was  more  than  suspected  to  have 
written,  The  Holy  Talk,  Name  and  Thing.1  It  was  a 
timely  Apologia  pro  religione  stta. 

The  accused  charged  King  and  bishops  with  an  in- 
tention to  "  change  the  orthodox  religion  and  intro- 
duce popery."  There  was  practically  no  defence.  It 
was  war  to  the  knife,  as  Bastwick  declared,  between 
the  Church  and  the  libellers.  Laud  would  not  vote, 
but  the  court  condemned  them  to  lose  their  ears,  to 
be  imprisoned  for  life  at  Guernsey,  Scilly,  Jersey,  and 
to  be  fined  £5000  each.  Laud  never  hesitated  in  his 
condemnation,  and  he  never  doubted  that  the  sentence 
was  according  to  law  and  custom.  "  Most  certain  it  is," 
he  was  bold  enough  to  say  at  his  own  trial,2  "  that  how- 
soever the  times  went  then  or  go  now,  yet  in  Queen 
Elizabeth's  time  Penry  was  hanged  and  Udal  con- 
demned and  died  in  prison  for  less  than  is  contained 
in  Mr.  Burton's  book,  as  will  be  evident  to  any  man 

1  There  is  in  the  Bodleian  Library  a  copy  of  Laud's  speech, 
with  MS.  notes,  which  Dr.  Kawlinson  certified  (from  a  memoir  of 
Arthur  Earl  of  Anglesey,  by  Pett,  p.  335)  to  have  been  written 
by  Williams.  They  are  extremely  bitter.  "  Ignorant  malice  and 
orthodoxal  wormwood  "  is  his  note  on  one  passage  (p.  26). 

2  Works,  iii.  391. 


LAUD  AND  THE  STATE 


137 


that  compares  their  writings  together.  And  these 
saints  would  have  lost  their  lives  had  they  done  that 
against  any  other  State  Christian  which  they  did 
against  this." 

It  was,  to  the  mind  of  Laud,  the  State  punishing 
the  expression  of  opinions  which  were  subversive  of  the 
social  order ;  but  his  personal  feeling  towards  libellers 
and  Puritans  had  no  bitterness.  "  I  pitied  them,"  he 
said,  "as  God  knows,  from  my  very  heart."1 

Other  cases,  though  less  famous,  should  not  be  passed 
by  without  comment.  Alexander  Leighton,  a  Scots 
minister,  had,  in  his  Sion's  Pica  against  Prelacy,  traced 
every  evil  of  the  time — moral,  political,  religious — to 
the  bishops,  "  men  of  blood  "  and  "  trumpery  of  Anti- 
christ." It  was  a  piece  of  railing  so  vulgar  and  violent 
that  we  should  nowadays  be  ready  to  receive  it  as  evi- 
dence of  a  lack  of  sanity  in  the  author.  Leighton, 
however,  was  too  staunch  in  his  opinions  and  too  bold 
in  repeating  his  charges  to  be  regarded  by  the  Star 
Chamber  as  anything  but  a  pestilent  libeller.  Laud,  it 
is  stated,  spoke  for  two  hours  at  the  trial,  but  we  have  no 
firsthand  evidence  of  what  he  said.2  Leighton  was  con- 
demned to  a  fine  of  £10,000  and  the  severest  corporal 
penalties,  but  the  King,  it  appears,  was  inclined  to  have 
pardoned  him.  He  fled,  was  recaptured,  and  suffered 
part  of  his  sentence,  was  scourged,  and  lost  an  ear.  His 
speech  on  the  scaffold  repeated  the  common  illusion  of 
a  religious  maniac.  "  He  told  the  people  he  suffered 
for  their  sins,  and  out  of  the  Psalms  and  Isaiah  applied 
unto  himself  the  prophecies  of  Christ's  sufferings." 
There  is  no  reason  to  attribute  to  Laud  any  rancour 

1  Works,  iii.  389. 

2  See  Gardiner,  Hist.  Eng.,  vol.  vii.  p.  150. 


138 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


against  Leighton.  The  accounts  we  have  of  the  trial, 
especially  Leighton's  Epitome,  are  inconclusive  where 
they  are  not  scanty. 

The  State  Papers  contain  many  other  references  to 
Laud's  action  in  the  court.  We  have  some  of  his  own 
notes  of  cases,  and  letters  of  judges  to  him.1  But  we 
are  not  justified  in  forming  any  other  conclusion  on  the 
evidence  before  us  than  that  Laud  acted  with  as  little 
personal  feeling  and  as  much  reverence  for  law  and 
order  as  he  did  in  every  other  sphere  of  his  work  The 
methods  of  the  court  were  not  of  his  making,  nor  its 
punishments  of  his  choosing.  It  must  also  be  remem- 
bered, when  the  horrible  severity  of  the  Star  Chamber 
sentences  is  condemned,  that  only  in  exceptional  cases 
were  the  fines  exacted,2  and  that  the  personal  punish- 
ments were  on  many  occasions  greatly  mitigated. 

When  we  judge  Laud  in  his  capacity  as  a  member  of 
the  Star  Chamber,  we  cannot  but  recognize  the  weak- 
ness of  each  particular  charge  of  cruelty,  or  of  personal 
influence.  He  sat  with  other  judges,  and  he  at  least 
could  say  of  the  unhappy  prisoners,  "  I  pitied  them 
from  my  very  heart." 

1  E.  g.  Cal.  State  Papers,  May  6,  1629 ;  May  17,  1629. 

2  See  Gardiner,  vol.  vii.  p.  148,  and  note. 


CHAPTER  V. 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME. 

Laud's  reputation,  good  or  ill,  as  an  ecclesiastical 
statesman  has  almost  entirely  obscured  bis  fame  as  a 
theologian.  His  sermons  are  almost  unknown  even  to 
students  of  the  seventeenth-century  pulpit,  and  his 
Controversy  with  Fisher  is  rarely,  if  ever,  referred  to  by 
modern  controversialists  who  contend  over  the  same 
field  and  not  infrequently,  though  perhaps  uncon- 
sciously, use  the  same  weapons. 

Two  hundred  years  ago  men  thought  differently. 
The  sermons  were  reprinted  even  in  the  dark  days 
of  the  suppression  of  the  Church,1  and  the  Conference, 
republished  four  times  in  the  seventeenth  century, 
became  the  authoritative  statement  of  the  position 
of  Anglicanism  in  opposition  to  the  Roman  claims. 
Charles  I.  made  an  analysis  of  it  with  his  own  hands, 
and,  as  his  last  gift  to  his  daughter  Elizabeth,  put  it 
side  by  side  with  Andrewes's  Sermons  and  Hooker's 
Ecclesiastical  Polity. 

For  the  oblivion  into  which  Laud's  pulpit  discourses 
1  An  edition  was  published  in  1651. 


140 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


have  fallen  many  reasons  might  be  assigned.  They 
are  probably  not  even  typical  of  his  style.  He  was  a 
constant,  and,  from  the  demand,  apparently  an  admired 
preacher.  He  preached  as  willingly  and  as  often  in 
little  country  churches  as  in  London  or  at  Court.  But 
he  seems  to  have  intentionally  avoided  all  ostentation 
and  as  far  as  possible  all  record  of  his  pulpit  ministry. 
Not  until  comparatively  late  in  his  career  did  he  notice 
in  his  Diary  even  his  most  important  discourses ;  and 
he  never  suffered  any  of  his  sermons  to  be  printed 
except  by  direct  royal  command.  In  his  will  he  left 
the  publication  entirely  in  the  hands  of  his  executors. 
Thus,  during  his  lifetime,  only  six  of  his  sermons  were 
published  :  all  of  them  were  preached  on  public  occa- 
sions, and  issued  by  order  of  James  I.  or  Charles  I. 
Oue  other  sermon,  preached  on  March  27,  1631,  on  the 
anniversary  of  the  royal  accession,  was  printed  without 
his  correction  or  revision,  after  his  death.  We  have 
thus  to  form  our  judgment  of  Laud  as  a  preacher  on 
seven  only  of  his  sermons,  and  those  all  of  an  "official" 
or  "  occasional "  nature.  There  are  few  preachers  who 
would  wish  to  be  judged  by  this  test. 

The  first  point  that  strikes  a  reader  of  the  sermons 
is  that  they  were  modelled  on  those  of  Bishop  An- 
dre vves.  Chamberlain,  writing  to  Carleton  of  the  first 
of  these  discourses,  says,  "  Herewithal  I  send  you  a 
sermon  of  Dr.  Laud's,  because  it  is  after  the  manner  of 
the  Bishop  of  Winchester's  preaching."  There  can  be 
no  doubt  that  Laud  admired  and  reverenced  Andrewes 
more  than  any  other  Churchman  of  his  day.  He  refers 
to  him  constantly  in  his  writings,  and  in  his  defence 
during  his  trial,  and  as  to  an  authority  beyond  appeal. 
Again  and  again  he  declares  that  he  followed  him 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  141 


and  hint  only.  "  All  that  I  used  was  according  to  the 
copy  of  the  late  Reverend  Bishop  of  Winchester." 
"  Nor  did  I  follow  the  Pontifical,  but  a  copy  of  learned 
and  reverend  Bishop  Andrewes,"  and  the  like.  In  his 
Diary  he  thus  recorded  his  death  :  "  Episcopus  Win- 
ton,  meritissimus,  lumen  orbis  Christiani,  mortuus 
est." 

Andrewes  was  admittedly  the  greatest  preacher  of 
the  day,  and  it  is  in  keeping  with  the  assimilative  and 
receptive  tone  of  Laud's  mind  that  he  should  have 
thus  consciously  modelled  himself  on  the  preacher 
whose  theology  he  so  completely  accepted.  No  imita- 
tion has  the  freshness  of  the  original,  but  it  must  be 
admitted,  I  think,  that  Laud  was  more  successful  than 
Bishop  Felton,  who  "  had  almost  marred  "  his  "  own 
natural  trot  by  endeavouring  to  imitate  his  artificial 
amble."  His  aim,  then,  was  completeness  rather  than 
connection.  His  sermon  was  directly  upon  the  text 
selected.  He  would  not  pass  to  application  till  he  had 
thoroughly  dissected  and  probed  to  the  uttermost  the 
passage  he  had  selected  to  dwell  upon.  He  sought 
too,  if  he  did  not  always  achieve,  a  clearness  of  direct 
statement :  he  had  noted  this  as  a  merit  when  he  first 
issued  the  sermons  of  his  exemplar  to  the  world.  His 
illustrations  are  drawn  from  the  Fathers  and  schoolmen, 
not  often  from  the  reformers,  except  Calvin,  whom  it 
may  be  conjectured  he  had  read  originally  to  confute 
him.  His  mental  attitude  is  conservative,  and  yet 
touched  with  a  certain  sharp  and  unconventional  free- 
dom. Like  all  the  preachers  of  the  day,  he  does  not 
disdain  the  assistance  of  humour  and  irony  and  of  illus- 
tration of  a  very  homely  sort.  Where  he  did  not  succeed 
in  at  all  approaching  his  model  was  in  pathos  or 


142 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


imagination :  yet  here  we  may  remind  ourselves  of 
the  very  limited  field  which  is  covered  by  the  dis- 
courses we  possess.  We  do  not  know  how  he  preached 
of  the  Incarnation,  the  Divine  Ministry,  the  Passion. 

The  original  characteristics  of  his  sermons  appear  to 
be  two.  They  illustrate  both  the  tendency  of  his  mind 
and  his  view  of  the  questions  of  the  time.  He  refers 
again  and  again  to  the  lessons,  or  the  psalms,  of  the 
day.  It  was  the  providential  ordering  of  God  through 
the  fixed  worship  and  ceremonial  of  the  Church  which 
appealed  to  him  from  the  first,  and  increasingly,  with 
a  solemn  and  overmastering  force.  God  taught  through 
rules  which  past  ages  had  laid  down,  not  independently 
of  them.  So  the  daily  lessons  and  psalms  spoke  to  him 
with  a  distinct  message,  a  special  teaching,  for  the  day. 
It  was  so  when  he  was  charged  with  treason  and  stayed 
waiting  till  the  evening  before  he  was  taken  to  the 
Tower.  "  I  went  to  evening  prayer  in  my  chapel. 
The  psalms  of  the  day  (ninety-three  and  ninety-four) 
gave  me  great  comfort.  God  make  me  worthy  of  it 
and  fit  to  receive  it."  So  in  his  sermon  before  the 
Parliament  of  1628,  he  draws  teaching  from  the  first 
lesson  at  Evening  Prayer,  and  then  ends  with  S.  Paul's 
prayer  and  benediction.  "  It  is  the  prayer  of  this  day, 
for  it  is  the  second  lesson  at  evening  service." 

The  other  characteristic  is  his  appeal  to  history,  seen 
in  his  fondness  for  historical  allusion  or  illustration. 
Preaching  on  March  17,  on  Unity,  he  is  reminded  that 
on  "this  day  Julius  Cassar  overthrew  Sextus  Pompeius 
....  and  this  very  day  too  Frederick  II.  entered 
Jerusalem,  and  recovered  whatsoever  Saladin  had  taken 
from  the  Christians.  But  I  must  tell  you  these  em- 
perors and  their  forces  were  great  keepers  of  unity." 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  143 


Like  all  the  writers  of  the  time,  he  has  an  insatiate 
fondness  for  quotation  :  in  this  same  sermon  he  quotes 
Lucan,  Csesar,  Cassiodorus,  Tacitus,  Seneca,  S.  Leo,  S. 
Augustine,  S.  Basil,  S.  Gregory,  S.  Chrysostom,  S. 
Bernard,  S.  Thomas  Aquinas,  Calvin,  Bucer,  and  many 
more  ;  but  in  the  case  of  the  Greek  Fathers  he  generally 
used  Latin  versions,  and  his  quotations  are  seldom  exact, 
indeed  they  are  many  of  them  rather  of  the  nature  of 
references.  The  sermon  on  Unity  is  typical  ;  of  his 
method.  It  was  designed  for  a  practical  object — to 
bring  the  Commons  at  the  opening  of  the  Parliament  of 
1628  to  see  the  weakness  that  was  caused  to  the  State 
by  divisions.  It  was  a  familiar  thought  with  him.  Jeru- 
salem, he  said  in  his  first  sermon  before  King  James, 
"  stands  not  here  for  the  city  and  the  State  only,  as 
many  of  the  ancient  name  the  city  only,  nor  for  the 
Temple  and  the  Church  only  ;  but  jointly  for  both.  For 
both :  therefore  when  you  sit  down  to  consult,  you 
must  not  forget  the  Church ;  and  when  we  kneel  down 
to  pray,  we  must  not  forget  the  State  :  both  are  but  one 
Jerusalem."  1  His  third  sermon  chose  the  same  subject 
— "  Jerusalem  is  built  as  a  city  that  is  at  unity  in  itself." 
Unhappily  it  was  easier  to  urge  than  to  influence. 

Few  then  as  are  the  sermons  of  Laud  which  we 
possess,  they  serve  in  a  measure  to  explain  the  nature 
of  his  power  over  Churchmen.  They  express  his  mind 
— decided,  clear,  forgetful  of  self,  fixed  on  great  ends, 
and  believing  that  the  policy  which  he  set  forth  was 
based  on  right,  on  precedent,  and  on  the  direction  of 
God  in  history. 

These  principles  go  some  way  to  explain  his  attitude 
on  the  Roman  question.    He  believed  firmly  in  the 
1  Works,  i.  5,  6. 


144 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


bases  of  the  English  Church  in  Holy  Scripture,  history, 
and  reason.  He  had  no  doubt  whatever  as  to  his 
position,  and  he  stood  to  it  firmly. 

Laud's  Controversy  with  Fisher  was  one  of  a  number 
of  similar  combats.  Only  in  its  interest  and  the  force 
of  its  dialectic  it  rose  above  the  rest.  They  may  have 
been  "  the  legitimate  successors  of  the  disputations  of 
the  schools"  ;  they  were  certainly  a  prominent  feature 
of  the  Reformation  movement,  and  not  least  of  the 
work  of  the  Jesuits  in  the  Catholic  reaction :  and  they 
were  especially  favoured  by  the  King,  who  was  a  trained 
theologian,  and  who  delighted  in  discussion. 

The  circumstances  of  this  conference,  however,  gave 
it  peculiar  interest.  The  Countess  of  Buckingham,  the 
mother  of  the  King's  friend,  was  "  wavering  in  point  of 
religion,"  1  or  perhaps  had  already  been  won  over  to  the 
Roman  Church  2 ;  she  had  been  under  instruction  from 
Father  John  Percy,  a  prominent  member  of  the  mis- 
sion, more  commonly  known  as  '  Fisher  the  Jesuit.' 

It  was  this  Percy  or  Piercy  who  had  brought  Chilling- 
worth  for  a  time  into  the  Roman  Church,  and  had  recently 
converted  Buckingham's  brother,  Lord  Purbeck  :  3  and 
it  is  clear  that  Buckingham  himself  was  doubting. 
Conferences  between  Fisher  and  Anglican  divines,  at 
one  of  which  the  King  had  himself  been  present,  had 
already  taken  place,  but  they  had  satisfied  no  one. 
The  Countess  of  Buckingham  required  more  clear  state- 
ment on  the  doctrine  of  "  a  continual,  infallible,  visible 
Church."   Thereupon  James  himself  commanded  Laud, 

1  Laud's  Diary,  April  23,  1622. 

2  See  Life  of  Archbishop  Laud,  by  'A  Romish  Eecusant,'  pp. 
76-7. 

3  Stonyhurst  MS.,  Anglia,  vol  vii.,  quoted  in  Life  of  Laud,  by 
'  A  Romish  Recusant,'  p.  76. 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  145 


then  Bishop  of  S.  David's,  to  meet  Fisher  in  discussion. 
On  May  24.  1022,  the  interview  took  place.  Whatever 
its  immediate  result, — and  it  at  least  confirmed  the 
shallow  Buckingham  in  the  Anglican  Church, — it  be- 
came, from  the  literature  which  flowed  from  it,  and 
from  the  prominence  which  Laud's  own  publication  of 
its  points  secured,  the  classic  presentation  from  the 
English  side  of  the  theological  differences  between 
England  and  Rome.  The  conference  got  into  print, 
and  the  first  report  produced  a  series  of  books.  Laud 
was  content  to  stand  to  the  judgment  of  posterity  on 
his  theology,  as  expressed  in  the  conference.  "  With 
what  strength  I  have  written,"  he  said  at  his  trial,  "  I 
leave  to  posterity  to  judge  when  the  envy  which  now 
overloads  me  shall  be  buried  with  me.  This  I  will  say 
with  S.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  '  I  never  laboured  for  peace 
to  the  wrong  and  detriment  of  Christian  verity,'  nor  I 
hope  ever  shall."  And  he  added  in  his  MS.,  "  Let  the 
Church  of  England,  for  in  great  humility  I  crave  to 
write  this — that  the  Church  of  England  must  leave  the 
way  it  is  now  going,1  and  come  back  to  that  way  of 
defence  which  I  have  followed  in  my  book,  or  she  shall 
never  be  able  to  justify  her  separation  from  the  Church 
of  Rome."  In  his  will  he  expressly  desired  that  the 
conference  might  be  translated  into  Latin  and  sent 
abroad,  "that  the  Christian  world  may  see  and  judge  of 
my  religion." 

Laud's  opinion  of  his  own  book  was  widely  shared  by 
his  contemporaries.  But  it  was  severely  attacked  by 
Romanists,  and  especially  in  the  "  Labyrinthus  Can- 
tuariensis ;  or  Dr.  Laud's  Labyrinth,"  by  T.  C,  in  10-38 

1  I.  c.  the  violent  "  No  Popery  "  cry  expressed  in  his  own  trial. 

L 


140 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


or  16C3.1  It  was  defended  by  Meric  Casaubou  and  by 
Stillingfleet.2  The  result  of  forty  years'  contention  was 
to  leave  it  the  strongest  expression  of  the  Anglican 
position.  In  modern  times  it  has  secured  the  con- 
demnation of  some  writers 3  as  dull,  and  the  appro- 
bation of  others4  as  vigorous.  Of  its  merits  few  readers 
can  have  any  real  doubt.  Sir  Edward  Dering,  foe 
though  he  was,  said  truly,  "  His  book  agaiust  the  Jesuit 
will  be  his  lasting  epitaph." 

Laud's  first  full  account  of  the  controversy  was 
published  in  1639.  Later  editions,  based  upon  the 
Archbishop's  corrections,5  were  issued  in  1673  and 
1686,  and  lb39  and  1849.  The  preface  to  the  original 
edition  contains  much  matter  of  personal  interest. 
Laud's  humour  breaks  out  in  his  offer  of  the  book  to 
his  Jesuit  opponent  as  "  such  a  bone  to  gnaw  as  may 
shake  his  teeth  if  he  look  not  to  it."  He  explains  the 
delay  in  the  publication  by  the  State  employments 
which  had  made  him  "  too  much  a  stranger  to  his 
books,"  as  well  as  the  fever  which  laid  him  low  in  the 
autumn  of  1629,  and  the  libels  which  clustered  round 
him  in  the  subsequent  years.  From  that  he  turns  to 
a  statement  of  the  Church's  danger.  "  She  professes 
the  ancient  Catholic  faith,  and  yet  the  Romanist  con- 
demns her  of  novelty  in  her  doctrine ;  she  practises 

1  The  title-page  says  "  Paris,  1658,"  but  Stillingfleet  asserts  that 
it  was  not  published  till  1663  (preface). 

2  'A  Romish  Recusant,'  who  lays  some  stress  on  T.  C.'s 
"  reputation,"  does  not  seem  to  have  met  with  Stillingfleet's 
reply. 

3  Such  as  Mr.  Benson,  Life  of  Laud,  pp.  95,  200.  "A  nearly 
unreadable  folio  "  is,  I  think,  a  somewhat  hasty  expression. 

4  Such  as  Sir  James  Stephen,  Home  Sabbaticae,  in  a  very 
interesting  and  valuable  criticism. 

5  A  copy  of  the  conference  in  the  Royal  Library  at  Windsor 
contains  MS.  corrections  in  Laud's  hand. 


THEOLOGY,  AND 


ATTITUDE 


TOWARDS  ROME  147 


Church  government  as  it  hath  been  in  use  in  all  ages 
and  all  places  where  the  Church  of  Christ  hath  taken 
any  rooting,  both  in  and  ever  since  the  Apostles'  times, 
and  yet  the  Separatist  condemns  her  for  anti-Chris- 
tianism  in  her  discipline.  The  plain  truth  is,  she  is 
between  these  two  factions,  as  between  two  millstones, 
and  unless  your  Majesty  look  to  it,  to  whose  trust  she 
is  committed,  she  will  be  ground  to  powder,  to  an 
irreparable  both  dishonour  and  loss  to  this  kingdom." 

In  the  controversy  itself  Laud  was  under  two  dis- 
advantages. He  had  little  if  any  knowledge  of  the 
previous  discussions,  and  no  information  of  the  ground 
which  he  was  himself  to  contest,  nor  so  much  as 
twenty-four  hours  to  prepare  himself.  And,  secondly, 
he  was  hampered — it  is  the  greatest  disadvantage  of 
English  controversialists  since  the  Keforination — by  the 
unauthorized  publications  of  Protestant  divines,  claim- 
ing to  speak  for  the  English  Church.  The  clearness 
and  accuracy  of  his  mind  nevertheless  served  him  in 
good  stead,  and  he  was  able  to  steer  clear  of  the 
dangers  that  beset  him. 

The  leading  lines  of  his  work  bear  considerable 
resemblance  to  those  taken  by  the  divines  of  to-day. 
The  position  of  the  Greek  Church,1  "  a  true  Church  in 
the  main  substance,  to  and  at  this  day,  though  erro- 
neous perhaps  in  some  points,"  was  a  strong  argument 
against  the  exclusive  claims  of  Rome.  "  I  dare  not 
deny  them  to  be  a  true  Church,"  he  said,  and  on  the 
Filioquc  controversy  he  spoke  with  true  theological 
j  udgment. 

The  infallibility  of  the  Church  also  was  a  point  of 
strongest  contention :  and  Laud  would  not  allow  iu- 
1  Works,  ii.  25. 


148 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


fallibility  to  any  particular  or  local  church.  The  par- 
ticular Church  of  Rome  has  erred,  and  cannot  be 
infallible.  To  this  point  he  returns  again  and  again. 
Rome  is  "  a  true  Church,  I  grant,"  1  but  not  the  true 
Church.  The  whole  Church  cannot  err,2  but  parts  can 
err  and  have  erred.  Salvation,  surely,  is  open  to 
Romanists,  but  "  not  as  they  are  Romanists  but  as 
they  are  Christians ;  that  is,  as  they  believe  the  Creed 
and  hold  the  foundation  Christ  Himself,  not  as  they 
associate  themselves  wittingly  and  knowingly  to  the 
gross  superstitions  of  the  Romish  Church."  3  Yet  to  say 
this  is  not  to  deny  the  privilege  of  the  Church.  "  For 
we  confess  as  well  as  you,  that  out  of  the  Catholic 
Church  of  Christ  there  is  no  salvation.  But  what  do 
you  mean  by  '  out  of  the  Church '  ?  Sure,  out  of  the 
Roman  Church.  Why,  the  Roman  Church  and  the 
Church  of  England  are  but  two  distinct  members  of 
that  Catholic  Church  which  is  spread  over  the  face  of 
the  earth.  Therefore,  Rome  is  not  the  house  where 
the  Church  dwells;  but  Rome  itself,  as  well  as  other 
particular  Churches,  dwells  in  this  great  universal 
house."  4 

It  is  Christ  Who  is  the  foundation  of  the  Universal 
Church :  and  Peter's  Rock  "  is  not  S.  Peter's  person, 
either  only  or  properly,  but  the  faith  which  he  pro- 
fessed. And  to  this,  besides  the  evidence  which  is  in 
text  and  truth,  the  Fathers  come  in  with  very  full 
consent."  5 

The  work  of  the  Reformation  and  the  deeds  of 
the  reformers  were,  then  as  now,  confused  by  con- 
troversialists for  purposes  of  attack  on  the  English 

i  Works,  ii.  143.  2  Ibid.,  ii.  155-8.          3  Ibid.,  ii.  333. 

4  Ibid.,  ii.  34(3.  5  Ibid.,  ii.  257. 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  149 


Church.  Laud's  answer  is  dignified  and  complete. 
"Reformation,  especially  in  cases  of  religion,  is  so  diffi- 
cult a  work,  and  subject  to  so  many  pretensions,  that 
it  is  almost  impossible  but  the  reformers  should  step 
too  far,  or  fall  too  short,  in  some  smaller  things  or 
other;  which,  in  regard  of  the  far  greater  benefit 
coming  by  the  Reformation  itself,  may  well  be  passed 
over  and  borne  withal.  But  if  there  have  been  any 
wilful  and  gross  errors,  not  so  much  in  opinion  as  in 
fact,  sacrilege  too  often  pretending  to  reform  super- 
stition, that  is  the  crime  of  the  reformers,  not  of  the 
Reformation ;  and  they  are  long  since  gone  to  God 
to  answer  it,  to  Whom  I  leave  them."  1 

Careful  though  he  is  to  reject  the  errors  of  the 
reformers,  Laud  does  not  reject  the  name  of  Protestant. 
He  rather  explains  its  meaning  and  its  historical  and 
Catholic  usage.  "  The  Protestants  did  not  get  that 
name  by  protesting  against  the  Church  of  Rome,  but 
by  protesting,  and  that  when  nothing  else  would  serve, 
against  her  errors  and  superstitions.  Do  you  but 
remove  them  from  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  our 
Protestation  is  ended,  and  the  separation  too.  Nor  is 
Protestation  itself  such  an  unheard-of  thing  in  the 
very  heart  of  religion.  For  the  sacraments  both  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are  called  by  your  own 
school  'visible  signs  protesting  the  faith.'  Now  if  the 
sacraments  be  protestantia,  '  signs  protesting,'  why  may 
not  men  also,  and  without  all  offence,  be  called  Pro- 
testants, since  by  receiving  the  true  sacraments  and 
by  refusing  them  which  are  corrupted,  they  do  but 
protest  the  sincerity  of  their  faith  against  the  doctrinal 
corruption  which  hath  invaded  the  great  Sacrament 
1  Works,  ii.  173-4. 


150 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


of  the  Eucharist,  and  other  parts  of  religion  ?  Especi- 
ally, since  they  are  men  which  must  protest  their  faith 
by  these  visible  signs  and  sacraments." 1 

Yet  Protestant  though  he  be,  Laud  by  no  means 
departs  from  Catholic  doctrine.  "  For  the  Church  of 
England  nothing  is  more  plain  than  that  it  believes 
and  teaches  the  true  and  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
Eucharist 2 ;  unless  A.  C.  can  make  a  Body  no  Body, 
and  Blood  no  Blood — as  perhaps  he  can  by  transub- 
stantiation,  as  well  as  bread  no  bread,  and  wine  no 
wine.  And  the  Church  of  England  is  Protestant  too."  3 
He  brings  Kidley  as  a  witness.  "  Both  you  and  I,"  he 
said  to  his  Roman  opponent,  "  agree  herein  :  that  in  the 
Sacrament  is  the  very  true  and  natural  Body  and  Blood 
of  Christ,  even  that  which  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
which  ascended  into  heaven,  which  sitteth  on  the  right 
hand  of  God  the  Father,  which  shall  come  from  thence 
to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead ;  only  we  differ  in 
modo,  '  in  the  way  and  manner  of  being ' :  we  confess  all 
one  thing  to  be  in  the  Sacrament,  and  dissent  in  the 
manner  of  being  there.  I  (being  fully  by  God's  word 
thereunto  persuaded)  confess  Christ's  natural  Body 
to  be  in  the  Sacrament  [indeed]  by  spirit  and  grace, 
&c.  You  make  a  grosser  kind  of  being,  enclosing  a 
natural  [a  lively  and  a  moving]  Body  under  the  shape 
and  form  of  bread  and  wine."  4   Nor  is  he  less  precise  or 

Works,  ii.  152. 

2  He  adds  a  note  quoting  the  English  Liturgy. 

3  The  rest  of  the  passage  is  not  relevant  to  my  point  here.  It 
may  be  argued  that  as  he  declares  Calvin  to  have  believed  in  a 
Real  Presence,  he  admits  English  agreement  with  him.  But  he 
nowhere  says  this  ;  and  if  he  had  meant  it  he  would  have  said  it. 

4  Works,  ii.  330.  From  these  and  many  other  passages  it  is 
clear  that  Mr.  Simpkinson,  Life  of  Land,  p.  129,  is  in  error  when 
he  implies  that  Laud  did  not  teach  the  Presence  of  Christ  in  the 
consecrated  elements. 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  151 


less  judicious  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharistic  sacrifice. 
"  At  and  in  the  Eucharist  we  offer  up  to  God  three 
sacrifices  :  one  by  the  priest  only,  that  is  the  com- 
memorative sacrifice  of  Christ's  death  ;  .  .  .  another  by 
the  priest  and  people  jointly,  and  that  is  the  sacrifice  of 
praise  and  thanksgiving ;  .  .  .  the  third,  by  every  parti- 
cular man  for  himself  only,  and  that  is  the  sacrifice  of 
every  man's  body  and  soul  to  serve  Him  in  both  all  the 
rest  of  his  life."  1  In  the  same  style  he  speaks  of  the 
authority  of  scripture  and  of  general  councils,  con- 
demns private  judgment  and  the  Romish  doctrine  of 
purgatory,  and  ends  by  a  repeated  denial  of  the  Pope's 
infallibility.2 

So  far  we  find  Laud  a  stalwart  assertor  of  the  position 
of  the  English  Church  as  firm  in  adherence  to  the 
Catholic  doctrine.  Of  equal  interest,  and  calculated  to 
win  an  even  wider  respect  and  agreement,  is  his  decisive 
claim  for  breadth  and  tolerance.  The  Church  of  England, 
in  his  assertion,  is  strong  and  Catholic  because  she 
utters  no  anathemas  where  Christ  has  not  uttered 
them.  "  She  comes  far  short  of  the  Church  of  Rome's 
severity,  whose  anathemas  are  not  only  for  thirty-nine 
articles,  but  for  very  many  more,  above  one  hundred  in 
matter  of  doctrine,  and  that  in  many  points  as  far 
remote  from  the  foundation  ;  though,  to  the  far  greater 
rack  of  men's  consciences,  they  must  all  be  made 
fundamental,  if  the  Church  have  once  determined 
them :  whereas  the  Church  of  England  never  declared 
that  every  one  of  her  articles  are  fundamental  in  the 

1  Works,  ii.  340-41. 

2  It  should  be  observed,  that  the  author  of  Land's  Labyrinth 
asserts  that  "  Catholic  faith  (in  this  particular)  only  obliges  us  to 
maintain  that  the  Pope  is  infallible  when  he  defines  with  a  general 
council"  (p.  143). 


152 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


faith.  For  it  is  one  thing  to  say,  No  one  of  them  is 
superstitious  or  erroneous  ;  and  quite  another  to  say, 
Every  one  of  them  is  fundamental,  and  that  in  every 
part  of  it,  to  all  men's  belief.  Besides,  the  Church  of 
England  prescribes  only  for  her  own  children,  and  by 
those  articles  provides  but  for  her  own  peaceable  con- 
sent in  those  doctrines  of  truth.  But  the  Church  of 
Rome  severely  imposes  her  doctrine  upon  the  whole 
world,  under  the  pain  of  damnation."  1 

For  himself,  as  for  the  National  Church,  he  says  that 
it  is  impossible  to  set  bounds  to  the  Divine  compassion. 
"  Nor  will  I  ever  take  upon  me  to  express  that  tenet  or 
opinion,  the  denial  of  the  foundation  only  excepted, 
which  may  shut  any  Christian,  even  the  meanest,  out 
of  heaven." 

These  were  bold  words,  or  so  they  seem  to  us  who  draw 
our  knowledge  of  seventeenth-century  theology  from 
the  bitter  controversialists  of  Rome  and  Geneva.  The 
"  ever-memorable  John  Hales,"  says  Clarendon,  "  would 
often  say  that  he  would  renounce  the  religion  of  the 
Church  of  England  to-morrow  if  it  obliged  him  to 
believe  that  any  other  Christian  should  be  damned." 
Chillingworth  and  Falkland  were  with  him ;  and 
William  Laud,  disciplinarian  and  Catholic  though  he 
was,  was  of  the  company. 

From  a  study  of  the  conference  with  Fisher  we  should 
expect  to  find  Laud  firm  in  his  own  position  against 
Rome,  but  not  in  favour  of  persecution  of  Romanists. 
Such  was  his  policy  in  Ireland,  where  he  was  eager  to 
substitute  conciliation  for  the  policy  of  mulct  and 
coercion.  In  England  the  question  was,  to  him,  even 
more  pressing.  There  the  Church's  chief  foes  were 
1  Worjcs,  i.  p.  CO. 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  153 


often  almost  of  her  own  household.  James's  constant 
negotiations  with  the  Papacy,  the  ostentatious  proselyt- 
ism  affected  by  Henrietta  Maria,  the  defection  of  some 
notable  personages  such  as  Lady  Falkland,  the  Countess 
of  Buckingham,  and  Sir  Tobie  Matthew,  and  the  presence 
about  the  Court  of  secret  as  well  as  open  Papal  agents, 
served  to  alarm  strong  defenders  of  English  Catholicity 
as  well  as  Puritau  haters  of  Rome  and  all  its  works. 

As  a  statesman,  and  a  minister  to  individual  souls, 
Laud  had  a  hard  task.  In  both  aspects  his  work 
demands  attention.  As  a  statesman  he  was  confronted 
by  the  gravest  political  dangers.  Popular  feeling  had 
never  forgotten  the  Gunpowder  Plot,  and  the  House  of 
Commons  under  Pym's  guidance  was  always  on  the 
track  of  real  or  imaginary  Popish  intrigues,  and  was 
sternly  set  on  severe  repression  of  Romanists.  It  was 
not  surprising  that  Laud  should  himself  be  accused  of 
"  Popery."  And  to  the  suspicious  eyes  that  were  on 
the  watch  there  seemed  to  be  evidence  to  warrant  the 
charge,  not  only  in  his  Catholic  principles,  but  in  actual 
negotiations  with  Rome.  The  letters  of  Panzani,  Con, 
and  Rossetti,1  papal  agents  at  the  English  Court  and  in 
Ireland,  show  how  far  the  intrigues  went.  Windebanke, 
who  had  been  raised  to  office  through  Laud's  instru- 
mentality, in  September  1635  professed  to  enter  into 
definite  discussion  with  Panzani,  and  in  the  next  month 
declared  that  he  had  the  King's  orders  to  confer  con- 
cerning a  possible  reunion.    The  negotiations  were  con- 

1  In  Roman  transcripts  in  Record  Office.  See  also  Historical 
MSS.  Commission',  Appendix  to  IX.  Report,  p.  360  sqq.  Panzani's 
Memoirs  (by  Rev.  J.  Berington)  do  not  contain  anything  of  import- 
ance relating  to  Laud.  On  Panzani's  notorious  ignorance  of 
English  opinion,  see  a  Roman  Catholic  writer,  Rev.  C.  Plowden, 
Remarks  on  Panzcmi's  Memoirs,  1794. 


154 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


tinued  by  Bishop  Mountague.  Panzani's  account  shows 
clearly  enough  how  greatly  he  both  misunderstood  and 
exaggerated  the  opinions  of  the  leaders  of  the  English 
Church.1  It  is  difficult  to  believe  that  any  one  who 
knew  Laud  as  Mountague  did  would  describe  him  as 
"  pauroso  e  circonspetto  " ;  but  even  on  Panzani's  show- 
ing it  was  admitted  that  Laud  showed  no  eagerness  for 
reunion,  and  had  warned  Charles  that  "  if  he  wished  to 
go  to  Rome,  the  Pope  would  not  stir  a  step  to  meet 
him." 2  Some  at  least  of  the  Roman  authorities  did 
not  regard  it  as  safe  to  meddle  with  him.3  But  it 
would  appear  that  efforts  were  made  to  allure  or 
to  entrap  Laud,  at  the  moment  when  Abbot's  death 
made  his  appointment  to  Canterbury  probable,  by 
the  offer  of  a  cardinal's  hat.  His  Diary,  which  states 
the  fact,  shows  how  decided  was  his  answer — "  My 
answer  was  that  somewhat  dwelt  within  me  which 
would  not  suffer  that  till  Rome  were  other  than  it  is." 
The  offer  was  probably  made  by  the  Queen,4  or  one  of 
her  suite.  Later,  Con,  a  Scotsman  who  knew  a  little 
more  of  English  affairs  than  the  Italian  Panzani,  made 
(according  to  Heylin)  the  same  offer  ;  but  Laud  always 
refused  to  see  him,5  and  not  even  the  detective  skill  of 
Prynne  could  find  any  evidence  of  negotiations  between 

1  I  may  be  permitted  to  refer  to  my  article  on  Richard  Moun- 
tague in  Dictionary  of  National  Biography. 

2  Panzani's  mission  is  exhaustively  discu-sed  by  Mr.  S.  R. 
Gardiner,  History  of  England,  vol.  vii.,  p.  130  sqq.  "Neither 
the  Archbishop  nor  the  King,''  he  well  says,  "  was  likely  to  listen 
seriously  to  such  a  scheme." 

3  An  Oratorian  father  sent  to  England  in  1635  was  forbidden 
on  "  any  pretext  whatever  to  allow  himself  to  be  drawn  into  com- 
munication with  the  new  Archbishop  of  Canterbury." — Barberini, 
quoted  in  Life  of  Land  by  'A  Romish  Recusant,'  p.  224. 

4  See  Dr.  Lingard,  Hist.  Eng.,  vol.  ii.,  chap,  v.,  footnote. 

5  Works,  iv.  332  ;  cf.  Home's  Masterpiece. 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  155 


them.  At  his  trial  Laud  clearly  rebutted  the  charge, 
"  declaring  that  if  he  had  desired  preferment  for  com- 
pliance with  the  Church  of  Rome,  he  might  have  had 
more  honour  in  foreign  parts  than  ever  he  was  likely 
to  obtain  here,  and  that  it  was  no  outward  honour  but 
his  conscience  that  caused  him  to  refuse  the  cardinal's 
hat."  1 

Count  Rossetti,  in  164*1,  appears  to  have  made  other 
efforts,  and  during  his  stay  in  Ireland  to  have  had  some 
communication  with  Archbishop  Usher,  certainly  a  very 
unlikely  person  to  lean  towards  Rome.2  A  strange 
story  is  told  of  an  offer  to  bribe  Laud  by  a  pension  of 
a  thousand  crowns.3  The  only  conclusion  that  can  be 
arrived  at  after  a  careful  consideration  of  all  these 
extraordinary  statements  is  that  the  Roman  agents 
were  more  active  than  intelligent,  and  that  their 
intrigues  gave  a  natural  foundation  for  Puritan  sus- 
picions, for  which  Laud's  own  conduct  and  opinions 
afforded  no  ground. 

Had  Laud  been  willing  to  seek  a  reconciliation  with 
Rome,  it  is  clear  that  he  would  not  have  been  so  eager  as 
he  was,  during  the  whole  of  his  career,  to  win  English 
converts  from  Romanism.  He  had  no  doubt  that  the 
English  Church  was  the  guardian  of  the  Catholic  faith 
in  the  island,  and  he  regarded  any  desertion  of  her  by 

1  Clarke  MS.,  Tuesday,  March  12,  1643.  This  interesting 
touch  is  not  to  be  found  in  Rushworth,  Prynne,  or  Laud's  own 
account. 

2  Geschiclrfe  der  Katholischen  Kirche  in  Irland,  von  A.  Belle- 
sheim,  vol.  i.  p.  688. 

3  See  Life  of  Laud,  by  '  A  Romish  Recusant,'  p.  395  sqq.,  and 
the  original  passage,  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  App.  to  IX.  Report,  p. 
350,  where  it  is  said  Laud  was  told  that  1500  scudi  per  annum 
would  be  enough  to  support  prelatical  state  in  Rome  !  There 
the  story  is  told  in  connection  with  M.  S.  Giles.  Cf.  Laud's 
Works,  iv.  326  sqq. 


156 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Englishmen  as  an  apostasy.  More  than  this.  Not 
only  was  the  question  of  jurisdiction  involved,  but  to 
his  mind  the  difference  between  England  and  Rome 
was  between  liberty  and  bondage.  This  explains  his 
constant  efforts  to  reclaim  English  converts,  and  makes 
so  conclusive  his  appeal  at  his  trial  to  the  success  of 
his  attempts.  He  gave  a  list  of  twenty- two  persons 
whom  by  his  own  persuasions  he  had  "  recalled  from 
Rome,"  and  he  added,  "  let  any  clergyman  of  England 
come  forth  and  give  a  better  account  of  his  zeal  to  this 
present  Church."  1  Among  the  names  he  gave  are  two 
of  special  interest.  Sir  William  Webbe,  his  own  kins- 
man,2 was  in  1633  brought  back  by  his  influence,  and 
with  the  ministration  of  Dr.  Cosin,  then  Rector  of 
Brancepeth.  An  interesting  letter  now  in  the  Record 
Office  thanks  Laud  for  his  religious  care,  and  promises 
to  be  guided  by  him,  especially  in  such  things  as 
belong  to  his  soul.  He  had  'on  Tuesday  last  received  the 
Blessed  Sacrament,  most  reverently  here  administered, 
intending:  to  continue  in  the  religion  and  communion  of 
the  Church  of  England  so  long  as  he  shall  live.' 3 

Chillingworth,  the  famous  writer  of  the  Religion  of 
Protestants,  was  a  man  of  much  greater  fame.  He  was 
Laud's  godson,  had  been  Fellow  of  Trinity,  and  then, 
being  converted  to  Romanism  by  the  adroit  Fisher, 
had  gone  to  study  at  Douay.  He  did  not  find  satis- 
faction  in  the  Roman  Communion,  and  eventually 

1  W&rks,  iii.  63—66,  iv.  413,  414,  note.  "At  his  going 
forth  Mr.  Peter  (sic)  told  him  there  were  those  ministers  that  could 
prove  not  only  22  but  200,  yea,  some  above  500,  that  were  con- 
verted by  their  diligent  and  faithful  labours  in  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  and  might  have  recalled  more  had  they  not  been 
silenced  by  him"  (Clarke  MS.).    Cf.  Works,  as  above. 

2  Grandson  of  his  uncle  Sir  W.  Webbe,  Lord  Mayor  of  London. 

3  Cat.  State  Papers,  1633-4,  p.  154. 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  157 


returned  to  Oxford.  Laud  had  not  lost  sight  of  him. 
In  March  1628  several  letters  passed  between  him  and 
Juxon,  and  the  latter  procured  interviews  between 
Sheldon  (then  Fellow  of  All  Souls',  and  described  by 
Juxon  as  "  an  ingenuous  and  discreet  man ")  and 
Chillingworth.  Eventually  Juxon  brought  Chilling- 
worth  directly  under  Laud's  influence,  though  he 
doubted  if  "all  his  motives  be  spiritual,  protest  he 
never  so  much."  1  The  position  which  Laud  had  taken 
up  in  his  controversy  with  Fisher  was  one  which 
appealed  with  great  force  to  the  acute  and  critical  mind 
of  Chillingworth.  Perplexed  and  doubting  when  con- 
fronted by  the  mass  of  authorized  teaching  and  com- 
pulsory belief  which  confronted  him  at  Douay,  he 
found  satisfaction  in  a  theory  such  as  Laud  had 
expressed  when  he  said,  "  the  Church  of  England  never 
declared  that  every  one  of  her  articles  are  fundamental 
in  the  faith  ;  for  it  is  one  thing  to  say,  '  No  one  of  them 
is  superstitious  or  erroneous,'  and  quite  another  to  say, 
'  Every  one  of  them  is  fundamental,  and  that  in  every 
part  of  it,  to  all  men's  belief.'  "  2 

Chillingworth  returned  to  the  English  Church,  and 
before  long  set  himself  to  write  a  defence  of  his  position 
against  the  Roman  controversialist  Knott.  "  Nothing 
is  necessary  to  be  believed  but  what  is  plainly  revealed," 
was  his  thesis,  and  it  is  not  difficult  to  sec  that  he  was 
indebted  for  it  to  the  teaching  of  Laud.  The  Religion 
of  Protestants  appeared  in  1G37,  the  Controversy  with 
Fisher  in  1G39.  They  were  both  signs  of  the  same 
movement.  Chillingworth  was  more  of  the  logician 
and  critic,  Laud  leaned  more  towards  theology  and 

1  For  the  correspondence,  see  Cal.  kliata  Papers. 

2  Works,  ii.  60. 


158 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


history,  but  their  contention  was  in  the  main  the  same. 
It  was  a  protest  against  the  all-embracing  dogmatism 
of  the  Papacy.1 

Sir  Kenelm  Digby,  the  eccentric  Cavalier  who  fills 
so  much  space  in  the  Memoirs  of  the  time,  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  one  of  Laud's  own  converts,  but 
he  none  the  less  felt  that  the  Archbishop  had  a  pecu- 
liar and  personal  interest  in  his  faith.  The  son  of 
the  Sir  Everard  Digby  who  had  taken  part  in  the 
Gunpowder  Plot,  he  was  brought  up  as  a  Romanist,  but 
had  come  over  to  the  English  Church,  and  afterwards 
became  intimate  with  Laud,  through  whom  he  pre- 
sented many  valuable  MSS.  to  the  University  of 
Oxford.  Laud  had  no  concern  in  his  conversion,  but 
speaks  of  it  as  occurring  when  he  was  of  full  discretion 
to  examine  the  contested  questions  for  himself.2  In 
1636  Digby  returned  to  the  Roman  Communion,  but 
with  no  loss  of  his  affection  for  the  Archbishop.  At 
the  very  point  of  his  conversion,  he  wrote,  "  I  acknow- 
ledge myself  excessively  bound  to  my  Lord's  Grace  of 
Canterbury  for  his  wonderful  goodness  and  affection 
shown  to  me  "  :  and  Laud's  letter  to  him  in  answer 
to  his  announcement  is  one  of  the  most  natural  and 
pathetic  that  he  ever  penned.3 

For  a  man  who  felt  so  deeply  as  did  Laud  on  the 

1  For  Laud's  connection  with  the  Look,  see  Works,  vi.  passim,. 
Cf.  Sir  James  Stephen,  Home  Subbaticac.  With  the  greatest  re- 
spect, I  am  unable  to  agree  with  Mr.  Gardiner's  statement  that 
Gheynell,  who  tormented  Chilling  worth  as  he  lay  dying,  descried, 
dimly  in  the  distant  future,  "  behind  "  his  "  deathbed,  the  shadowy 
forms  of  Voltaire  and  the  Commune  of  Paris." 

2  Laud's  Works,  vii.  450, 452  ;  cf.  Life,  by  '  A  Romish  Recusant,' 
pp.  272,  273. 

3  The  '  Romish  Recusant,'  kindly  though  his  tone  is,  perhaps 
hardly  does  it  full  justice. 


THEOLOGY,  AND  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  ROME  159 


"  Roman  question,"  it  was  no  slight  exercise  of  gener- 
osity to  write  with  no  touch  of  bitterness ;  and  while 
deploring  the  silence  that  Digby  had  observed  towards 
him  during  the  period  of  his  doubts,  to  end,  "  a  poor 
but  respective  friend  I  have  been  ever  since  I  knew 
you;  and  it  is  not  your  change  that  can  change  me, 
who  never  yet  left  but  where  I  was  first  forsaken,  and 
not  always  there."  And  Digby  at  least  ajjpreciated  the 
friendship,  for  amid  the  danger  that  beset  every  one 
who  would  say  a  word  for  Laud  during  his  trial,  he  bore 
witness  strongly  in  his  favour,  and  ever  spoke  of  him 
with  respect  and  affection. 

It  was  not  only  in  his  writings  or  in  his  dealings 
with  individuals  that  Laud  showed  himself  a  decided 
foe  of  the  Roman  claims.  The  very  principles  of  his 
theology,  his  appeal  to  reason,  to  criticism,  and  to 
history,  made  those  Romanists  who  knew  England  best 
rejoice  at  his  fall.  "  They  had  cause  to  rejoice,"  said 
one  of  them,  when  the  news  of  his  death  reached  Rome, 
"  that  the  greatest  enemy  of  the  Church  of  Rome  in 
England  was  cut  off,  and  the  greatest  champion  of  the 
Church  of  England  silenced."  1 

Yet  foe  though  Laud  was  to  the  Roman  claims,  he 
observed  a  distinction  which  was  far  from  common  in 
his  time.  He  was  always  opposed  to  the  enforcement 
of  persecuting  laws  against  the  English  Romanists. 
He  was  willing  to  recognize  the  ministrations  of  their 
clergy,  within  certain  limits,  in  England.  He  spoke 
with  respect  of  the  Roman  bishop  of  Chalcedon,  and 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  actively  adverse  to  a 
spiritual  jurisdiction  over  Romanists  in  England  being 


1  See  Works,  iv.  504. 


160 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


exercised  by  a  Vicar- Apostolic.1  Arid  he  again  and 
again  decisively  pronounced  against  any  punishment 
for  mere  opinion,  and  adhered  to  the  principle  upon 
which  the  English  government  had  always  claimed  to 
act.  "When  divers  Romish  priests  and  Jesuits  have 
deservedly  suffered  death  for  treason,"  he  declared  at 
the  trial  of  Prynne,  Burton,  and  Bastvvick,  "  is  it  not 
the  constant  and  just  profession  of  the  State,  that  they 
never  put  any  man  to  death  for  religion,  but  for  rebel- 
lion and  treason  only  ?  Doth  not  the  State  truly 
affirm,  that  there  was  never  any  law  made  against  the 
life  of  a  Papist,  quatcnus  a  Papist  only  ?  And  is  not 
all  this  stark  false,  if  their  very  religion  be  rebellion  ? 
For  if  their  religion  be  rebellion,  it  is  not  only  false, 
but  impossible,  that  the  same  man,  in  the  same  act, 
should  suffer  for  his  rebellion  and  not  for  his  religion. 
And  this  King  James  understood  very  well,  when  in 
his  Premonition  to  all  Christian  Monarchs  he  saith, 
'  I  do  constantly  maintain  that  no  Papist,  either  in  my 
time,  or  in  the  time  of  the  late  Queen,  ever  died  for  his 
conscience.' " 2 

To  the  end,  amid  the  wildest  terrors  of  alarmed 
Protestantism,  and  when,  between  the  intrigues  of  the 
Court,  the  weakness  of  the  King,  and  the  fierce  attacks 
of  his  adversaries,  it  was  difficult  indeed  to  keep  a  clear 
head  and  a  brave  heart,  he  steered  an  even  course. 
Rome  could  not  lure  nor  could  Geneva  affright  him. 
His  heart  stood  fast,  for  he  believed  in  the  Divine 
mission  which  God  had  given  to  the  English  Church. 

1  See  Brady's  Annals  of  the  Catholic  Hierarchy  in  England 
and  Scotland,  p.  102.  Eut  he  utterly  opposed  the  establishment 
of  "any  Popish  hierarchy  "  (Works,  iii.  419). 

-  Works,  vi.  54,  55. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


FOREIGN  REFORMED  BODIES:  IRELAND  AND  SCOTLAND. 

Laud's  relations  to  foreign  reformed  bodies  might 
appear  to  be  likely  to  throw  light  on  his  position  with 
regard  to  the  Roman  claims.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  there 
is  little  in  them  of  any  interest.  One  of  his  earliest 
essays  in  Divinity  had  been  to  "  unchurch  "  the  foreign 
Protestants1;  and  there  is  nothing  in  his  public  action 
to  show  that  he  ever  changed  his  opinion.  He  spoke 
at  his  trial  in  condemnation  of  the  English  custom  of 
setting  great  store  by  foreign  opinion  in  religious 
matters.2  His  own  opinion  was  clean  contrary.  "  The 
worst  thought  I  had  of  any  reformed  Church  in 
Christendom,"  he  said,3 — and  the  passage  admirably 
expresses  his  whole  attitude  on  the  question, — "  was  to 
wish  it  like  the  Church  of  England ;  and  so  much 
better  as  it  should  please  God  to  make  it.  And  '  the 
deepest  intention'  I  had  concerning  all  or  any  of  them 
was  how  they  might  not  only  be  wished,  but  made 
so."    Political  exigencies,  the  national  interest  in  the 

1  Cf.  also  Cont.  Fisher,  Works,  ii.  194,  note  u  ;  iv.  307. 
-  Works,  i ii.  352.  3  Ibid.,  in.  374. 

M 


162  WILLIAM  LAUD 

Thirty  Years'  War,  and  the  sad  plight  of  the  King's 
sister  Elizabeth  and  her  children,  made  it  impossible 
for  him  to  avoid  much  correspondence  on  German 
politics.  We  find  him  constantly  corresponding  with 
Sir  Thomas  Roe  (whose  wife  he  had  known  as  a  child), 
Charles's  envoy  to  the  Swedish  king,  but  the  subject 
of  the  correspondence  is  mainly  political.  A  project 
for  an  union  between  the  Lutheran  and  Calvinist  bodies, 
which  was  undertaken  by  a  Scots  clergyman  named 
John  Durie.  received  but  "languid  support"1  from  the 
Archbishop.  The  negotiations  dragged  on  from  1632 
to  1636.  The  greater  part  of  the  letters  that  passed 
have  been  preserved,  and  are  now  among  the  MSS.  of 
Lord  Braye  and  of  the  House  of  Lords.  Laud  was 
ready  to  advocate  an  union  between  the  two  divisions 
of  German  Protestants,  and  spoke  of  Mr.  Durie's  in- 
tentions as  "  very  pious " ;  but  he  was  careful  in  no 
way  to  commit  the  King,  the  Church,  or  himself  to 
any  further  project. 

The  pressing  requests  of  Sir  Thomas  Roe  were  en- 
tirely unavailing.2  Laud  instructed  Sir  Robert  Anstru- 
ther  that  the  King's  name  was  on  no  account  to  be 
engaged  without  his  express  warrant.3  He  endeavoured 
as  much  as  possible  to  keep  out  of  foreign  complications. 

1  The  phrase  is  Mr.  Gardiner's  (Hist.  Eng.,  vol.  vii.  p.  314), 
and  appears  like  to  be  fully  justified  by  the  correspondence  (see 
Cal.  State  Papers,  Land's  Works,  and  especially  the  MSS.  of 
Lord  Braye,  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Report  X.,  App.,  pt.  6,  p.  130 
sqq.).  A  different  view  is  taken  in  the  Life  of  Archbishop  Laud, 
by  '  A  Romish  Recusant,'  p.  191  sqq.,  in  which  it  is  contended 
that  Laud  was  anxious  for  an  union  of  all  Protestant  bodies, 
including  the  Church  of  England.  The  author  does  not  appear 
to  have  seen  the  correspondence  in  Lord  Rraye's  MSS.,  which 
seems  to  me  absolutely  conclusive  evidence  to  the  contrary. 

2  See  Cal.  State  Papers,  1633-4,  July  31,  1633,  p.  161. 
s  Braye  MSS.,  p.  131. 


FOREIGN  REFORMED  BODIES 


163 


The  letters  of  Elizabeth  and  her  son  Charles  Louis 
received  but  tepid  replies.  "  I  do  not  doubt,"  Sir 
Thomas  Roe  was  obliged  to  write  to  Elizabeth  in  1635,1 
"  my  Lord  of  Canterbury  hath  good  inclinations,  and 
as  much  credit  as  ever  any  servant  had,  but  he  is  not 
versed  in  foreign  affairs,  and  he  is  fearful  to  engage 
himself  and  his  master  in  new  ways  and  of  doubtful 
event."  That  he  did  not  meddle  with  foreign  politics 
where  he  could  help  it  was  due  no  doubt  both  to 
prudence  and  to  the  feeling  which  he  entertained  to- 
wards the  religious  dissensions  of  the  Protestants.  The 
King  too  held  a  middle  course.  He  "  no  doubt  felt 
an  interest  in  his  nephew's  fortunes  and  desired  to 
assist  him,  but  when  definite  proposals  were  put  before 
him  he  never  could  see  anything  in  them  but  their 
difficulties."2  The  Elector  Charles  Louis  and  his  brother 
Rupert  paid  a  long  visit  to  England,  and  remained  till 
the  end  of  July  1637,  but  achieved  nothing. 

The  relations  between  Laud  and  the  pastors  of  the 
Swiss  Reformed  bodies  bear  out  the  view  that  the  English 
Church  was  not  willing  to  enter  into  anything  of  the 
nature  of  ecclesiastical  union  with  the  foreign  Protest- 
ants. The  missions  of  Wake  and  Fleming  were  con- 
fined to  the  encouragement  of  a  general  alliance  against 
the  Hapsburgs.  When  the  Swiss  pastors  endeavoured  to 
appeal  to  religious  agreement,  and  to  espouse  the  cause 
of  the  Scots  Presbyterians,  they  were  met  with  polite 
but  chilling  replies.3    At  home  his  action  towards  the 

1  Coil.  State  Papers,  1635,  July  fa  p.  244.  There  are  a 
number  of  letters  from  the  Queen  of  Bohemia  to  Laud,  e.g.  Feb. 
A,  1634  ;  April       1635  ;  1636. 

2  Cal.  State  Papers,  1637,  Preface,  p.  xxv. 

3  See  the  letters  printed  by  Professor  Stern  from  Zurich  archives 
in  his  interesting  paper,  Die  Beforrmrte  Schweiz  m  ihren  Bezie- 


164 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


foreign  reformed  bodies  was  more  decided.  He  set  him- 
self resolutely  to  win  them  to  the  Church  of  England. 
Both  as  bishop  and  archbishop,  in  his  own  name  and 
the  King's,  he  urged  and  required  that  they  should 
attend  the  worship  of  the  national  Church.  In  his 
memoranda  for  his  metropolitical  visitation1  he  put 
under  the  sees  of  Canterbury  and  Norwich  a  special 
inquiry  as  to  what  liturgy  was  used  in  the  foreign 
refugee  churches,  and  whether  those  who  were  born 
English  subjects  would  not  conform.  His  vicar- 
general,  Sir  Nathaniel  Brent,  found  the  French  and 
Dutch  ministers  willing  to  do  their  best  to  meet  the 
Primate's  wishes,  and  some  degree  of  conformity  at  least 
was  attained.2  It  was  Laud's  belief  that,  having  settled 
in  England,  the  refugees  should  conform  to  the  uses  of 
the  Catholic  Church  in  the  country.  He  urged  that 
they  should  be  present  at  the  Eucharist,  and  hoped 
that  in  the  next  generation  their  children  would  be 
definitely  brought  up  as  English  Churchmen.3 

As  Bishop  of  London  he  Avas  charged  with  the 
superintendence  of  British  congregations  abroad.  It 
was  his  care  to  see  that  they  did  not  lapse  into  the 
customs  of  the  foreign  Protestants.  In  1633  the  British 


hungen  zu  Karl  I.  von  England,  William  Land,  Erzbischqf  von 
Canterbury,  und  den  Covenanters. 

1  Cal.  State  Papers,  1634-5,  p.  575. 

2  Mr.  Gardiner  speaks  of  this  policy  with  severity,  vol.  viii. 
pp.  120-21. 

3  'A  Romish  Recusant'  (p.  214)  says,  "  The  late  Dean  Stanley 
was  blamed  by  High  Churchmen  for  admitting  people  who  did 
not  believe  in  the  Divinity  of  our  Lord  to  Communion  ;  yet  the 
great  champion  of  their  own  school,  Archbishop  Laud,  ivould  not 
only  have  admitted  them,  but  would  have  exempted  them  from 
penalties  in  return  for  their  compliance."  I  can  find  no  ground 
for  this  statement. 


FOREIGN  REFORMED  BODIES 


165 


ambassador  at  the  Hague  wrote  to  the  English  Council 
that  the  merchant  adventurers  at  Delft  had  fallen  en- 
tirely into  Presbyterianism.1  Laud  took  the  matter  in 
hand.  He  was  placed  on  the  committee  for  consider- 
ing the  business  of  the  merchant  adventurers.  In 
1634  a  new  priest  was  sent  to  them,  and  the  merchants 
were  strictly  enjoined  that  in  all  things  they  conform 
to  "  the  doctrine  and  discipline  settled  in  the  Church 
of  England."2  In  1637  3  Laud  is  found  to  be  paying 
special  attention  to  the  appointment  of  the  deputies  or 
resident  agents  at  the  staple  towns,  on  whose  action  it 
was  found  that  the  regulation  of  Church  matters  in  the 
towns  greatly  depended.  He  had  previously  succeeded 
in  obtaining  the  use  of  the  Prayer-Book  by  the  English 
regiments  in  the  Dutch  service.  His  hopes  went  further. 
He  had  drawn  up,  with  Juxon,  a  '  Form  of  Penance  and 
Reconciliation  of  Apostates  from  the  Christian  Religion 
to  Turcism.' 4  He  and  his  brother  prelates  hoped  to 
remove  the  horrible  scandal  of  apostasy.  They  planned, 
says  Heylin,  that  there  should  be  "  a  Church  of  England 
in  all  courts  of  Christendom,  in  the  chief  cities  of  the 
Turk  and  other  great  Mahometan  princes,  and  in  all 
our  factories  and  plantations  in  every  known  part  of  the 
world,  by  which  it  might  be  rendered  as  diffused  and 
Catholic  as  the  Church  of  Rome." 

The  idea  shows  the  width  and  enthusiasm  of  Laud's 
outlook.    But  difficulties  nearer  home  prevented  the 

1  Cal.  State  Papers,  March  18,  1633. 

2  Ibid.,  June  21,  1634.  3  Ibid.,  1637.    Preface,  p.  xxvii. 

4  'A  Romish  Recusant,'  Life  of  Laud,  p.  310,  somewhat 
strangely  censures  this  office  for  its  lack  of  any  attractive  character. 
But  surely  a  severely  penitential  treatment  is  the  only  public 
recognition  the  Church  could  give  of  her  horror  of  the  sin  of  one 
who  had  put  Christ  to  au  open  shame. 


IGG 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


realization  of  any  such  magnificent  schemes.  The 
claims  of  Ireland  and  of  Scotland  came  upon  the 
Primate  as  more  pressing  and  immediate. 

Towards  Ireland  Laud  was  drawn  both  as  an  educa- 
tionalist and  as  a  friend  of  Wentworth.  Perhaps  his 
first  Irish  interest  was  that  in  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 
The  history  of  his  relations  with  that  body  may  serve 
as  an  introduction  to  that  of  his  connection  with  the 
Irish  Church  as  a  whole. 

His  letters  to  Strafford  show  him  always  an  enthu- 
siastic admirer  of  his  own  University.  There  is  many 
a  mock  at  the  "  Cambridge  man  "  1  and  the  customs  of 
his  alma  mater,  and  Strafford  replies  with  jests  at 
Oxford  and  S.  John's.  When  he  was  called  upon  to 
undertake  the  reform  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  it  was 
upon  the  Oxford  model  that  he  proceeded  to  work. 
Abbot  had  been  Chancellor.  On  his  death,  Archbishop 
Usher,  the  Irish  Primate,  was  eager  that  Laud  should 
succeed  him.  He  was  the  most  powerful  friend  the 
College  could  win,  and  his  intimate  knowledge  of 
University  life,  no  less  than  his  generous  patronage  of 
learning,  seemed  to  mark  him  as  peculiarly  fitted  for 
the  post.  The  Fellows  readily  chose  him,  and  he  some- 
what reluctantly  accepted  the  honour.  "  I  am  sorry 
they  have  chosen  me  Chancellor,"  he  wrote  to  Strafford, 
"  and  if  they  will  follow  the  directions  I  have  given 
them  by  my  Lord  Primate,  I  hope  they  will  send  me  a 

1  E.  g.  "  I  pray  what  means  tins  Johnnism  of  yours,  '  till  the 
rights  of  the  Pastors  be  a  little  more  settled ' }  You  learnt  this 
from  old  Alvye  or  Billy  Nelson  ;  for  where,  I  pray,  in  all  the 
ancient  Fathers  do  you  find  Pastor  applied  to  any  but  a  Bishop  ? 
Well,  I  see  the  errors  of  your  breeding  will  stick  by  you  :  Pastors 
and  elders  and  all  will  come  in  if  I  let  you  alone." — L.  to  S., 
Works,  vi.  373. 


IRELAND 


167 


resignation  that  I  may  give  it  over  and  your  lordship 
be  chosen,  being  upon  the  place,  and  able  to  do  them 
more  good."  He  was  elected  September  14,  1633.  The 
condition  of  the  college  was  such  as  to  suggest  if  not 
to  demand  revision  of  the  statutes.  His  action  as 
Chancellor  was  of  a  piece  with  the  work,  in  which  he  so 
heartily  joined  with  the  Lord-Deputy,  of  reviving  and 
strengthening  the  Irish  Church.  Trinity  College  had 
fallen  into  neglect.  Its  members  were  few  and  its 
scholars  indifferent.  The  provision  that  Fellowships 
should  be  held  only  for  seven  years  after  the  M.A. 
degree  was  believed  to  act  disadvantageously,  as  pre- 
venting a  permanent  interest  among  the  officials  in  the 
progress  of  the  college.  The  Fellows  also  were  a 
quarrelsome  body,  and  Strafford  had  frequently  to  inter- 
vene to  make  peace.  Laud  took  up  the  work  of 
Chancellor  in  the  same  spirit  in  which  he  took  up  the 
rest  of  his  multifarious  activities.  He  could  not  abide 
my  Lady  Mora.  "  Since  they  have  made  me  Chancellor, 
and  your  Lordship  approves  them  in  so  doing " — he 
wrote  the  day  after  he  had  news  of  his  appointment — 
"  I  will  begin  to  take  them  to  task."  Two  provosts 
successively  held  office  during  his  Chancellorship, 
Robert  Usher,  a  kinsman  of  the  Irish  Primate,  and 
a  man  of  slight  merit,  and  William  Chappell,  Dean 
of  Cashel,  a  "  very  worthy  person,"  who  "  begot  a 
mighty  reformation  among  them."  During  the  latter 
provostship  the  college  was  greatly  increased,  and 
the  Deputy  himself  did  his  utmost  to  encourage  it 
by  entering  his  son  William,  a  little  boy  of  eleven. 

Laud's  measures  may  be  thus  briefly  summarized. 
He  procured  new  statutes  under  the  Great  Seal.  By 
these  the  number  of  Visitors  (a  source  of  considerable 


168 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


confusion  and  contention)  was  reduced  to  two — himself 
as  Chancellor,  and  the  Archbishop  of  Dublin.  The 
appointment  of  Vice-Chancellor  was  given  to  the 
Chancellor,  to  whom  also  all  cases  of  moment  were  to 
be  referred,  and  who  was  given  power  to  appoint  to  a 
Senior  Fellowship  when  the  Board  failed  to  fill  it  up. 
The  Fellowships  were  made  tenable  for  life  under  the 
usual  conditions,  and  further  powers  were  conferred  on 
the  Crown.  These  changes,  it  will  be  seen,  were  all 
designed  simply  to  give  the  college  the  organization  of 
the  older  Universities,  and  to  prevent  the  anarchy 
which  naturally  arose  in  an  ill-regulated  oligarchy  of 
scholars.  Laud  did  his  best  to  raise  the  standard  of 
Irish  education  in  Dublin  by  recommending  to  Fellow- 
ships several  Irish  scholars,  and  he  encouraged  the 
teaching  of  Irish  in  the  college.  "  There  is  no  doubt," 
says  the  latest  historian  of  Trinity  College,  "  of  the 
wisdom  which  is  conspicuous  in  Laud's  emendation  of 
the  statutes,  and  of  the  excellent  fruit  which  it  after- 
wards produced  in  the  growth  and  success  of  the 
college."  1  Trinity  College  was  to  be  the  intellectual 
training-ground  for  an  Irish  ministry,  purged  of  the 
narrow  Calvinism  which  was  so  hateful  to  their  country- 
men, and  instructed  in  the  doctrines  of  the  Catholic 
Church  to  which  the  Irish  were  so  loyal.  That  Irish 
Catholicism  need  not  be  Roman  it  was  Laud's  strenuous 
and  persistent  endeavour  to  show.  And  in  this  Stratford 
was  of  one  heart  and  mind  with  him.  They  would 
substitute  learning  for  vulgar  invective,  and  the  influence 
of  personal  piety  for  that  of  persecution. 

1  Stubbs,  Hist.  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  p.  78.  This  statement  is 
controverted,  but  with  very  small  argument,  by  Mr.  Unvick, 
Early  History  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  p.  36  sqq. 


IRELAND 


169 


"  I  am  most  confident,"  wrote  Laud,  "  that  since  the 
Reformation  there  was  never  any  deputy  in  that  king- 
dom intended  the  good  of  the  Church  so  much  as  your 
lordship  doth." 

Strafford's  own  letters  and  the  testimony  of  Carte 
show  the  condition  of  the  Irish  Church  at  the  time 
of  his  appointment  to  the  deputyship  to  have  been 
deplorable.  Many  of  the  cathedrals  were  destroyed, 
and  a  great  number  of  the  parish  churches  ruined, 
unroofed,  or  unrepaired.  The  rapacity  of  the  lay  lords 
who  carried  out  the  Reformation  had  appropriated  the 
tithes,  most  of  which  before  the  dissolution  had  be- 
longed to  religious  houses;  many  were  in  private 
hands,  others  in  those  of  the  Crown.  The  bishoprics 
were  wretchedly  endowed — some  paying  no  more  than 
£50  a  year ;  and  "  in  the  whole  province  of  Connaught 
scarce  a  vicar's  stipend  exceeded  forty  shillings  a  year, 
and  in  many  places  only  sixteen  shillings."  This  account 
is  substantiated  by  a  graphic  letter  of  Bramhall  to 
Laud,  August  10,  1633.1 

Several  of  the  Irish  bishops  were  only  waiting  for 
some  official  encouragement  from  England  to  under- 
take in  earnest  the  needed  reformation  of  their  dioceses. 
In  January  1633  the  Archbishop  of  Cashel  wrote  to 
Laud,  begging  that  some  steps  might  be  taken  for  the 
restoration  of  "  Church  manses  and  glebes  "  to  the  incum- 
bents, "a  thing  very  necessary  for  the  better  plantation 
of  the  gospel  by  the  residence  of  sufficient  curates,  by 
whom  the  daily  service  may  be  performed,  and  at  least 
the  children  of  the  parish  catechised."  2    This  was  in 

1  Cat.  State  Papers,  1633-4,  p.  179. 

2  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  12th  Report,  App.,  Part  2  ;  Coke  MSS. 
p.  2. 


170 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Laud's  own  spirit.  He  wrote  to  Wentworth 1  his  wish 
"  that  the  Divine  Service  may  be  read  throughout  the 
Churches,  be  the  Company  that  vouchsafe  to  come 
never  so  few.  Let  God  have  His  whole  service  with 
Reverence,  and  He  will  quickly  send  in  more  to  help 
to  perform  it." 

A  Reformation  in  Ireland  had  not  been  called  for 
as  in  England  by  national  sentiment,  by  a  revival  of 
learning,  and  by  the  long  growth  of  opposition  to  the 
Papacy.  The  Act  of  Supremacy  was  rejected  by  a 
Dublin  Parliament  of  1536,  and,  though  it  was  after- 
wards carried,  the  reformed  liturgy  was  only  set  forth 
by  royal  proclamation.  Elizabeth's  Acts  of  Supremacy 
and  Uniformity  were  established  by  a  packed  Parlia- 
ment. The  Reformation  in  Ireland  came  from  above ; 
there  was  no  popular  feeling  from  below  to  meet  it. 
Still,  the  leaders  of  the  Irish  Church  had  accepted  the 
change,  and  Wentworth  found  an  ecclesiastical  body 
established  in  full  communion  with  the  English  Church, 
though  differing  in  its  Articles  and  Canons.  Both  as 
the  representative  of  Charles,  and  as  himself  a  sincere 
Churchman,  his  action  was  natural.  It  may  be  traced 
in  all  its  aspects  in  Laud's  letters,  with  his  replies — 
for  Laud  from  the  first  took  a  keen  missionary  interest 
in  the  progress  of  the  Irish  Church.  Its  leading  lines 
may  be  thus  summarized. 

Towards  Romanists  he  adopted  a  policy  of  gentleness. 
He  saw  that  persecution  was  no  way  to  win  over  the 
recusants,  or  to  build  up  a  uuited  Irish  Church.  He 
ceased  to  exact  the  irritating  fines  which  Elizabethan 
policy  levied  on  those  who  did  not  attend  church. 
"  This  course,"  he  wrote  to  Secretary  Coke,  "  will  never 
1  Straff.  Papers,  vol.  i.  p.  256. 


IRELAND 


171 


bring  them  to  church,  being  rather  an  engine  to  drain 
money  out  of  their  pockets  than  to  raise  a  right  belief 
and  faith  in  their  hearts."  Laud  wrote  especially  on 
this  point  to  Bishop  Bedell,  assuring  him  of  the 
wisdom  of  this  mildness.  It  was  accompanied  by  an 
endeavour  to  put  forward  the  Irish  Church  as  the 
national  Church,  and  as  holding  all  Catholic  doctrines. 
Here  Strafford  acted  with  a  firmness  that  bordered  on 
despotism.  The  Lambeth  Articles  had  been  passed 
in  Ireland  in  1616,  mainly  under  Usher's  influence. 
They  were.  Calvinistic  and  anti-sacerdotal.  Several  of 
them  "gave  great  offence  to  the  Roman  Catholics  and 
hindered  their  conversion,  and  others  of  them  gave  as 
much  encouragement  to  the  Puritans  brought  out  of 
Scotland  into  Ulster :  and  both  made  their  advantage 
of  them  to  the  prejudice  of  the  Church  of  Ireland." 
Strafford  would  have  the  English  Articles  instead. 
It  was  a  sharp  piece  of  business.  Convocation  was 
reluctant,  and  the  Primate  timid ;  but  Strafford 
triumphed,  and  the  English  Articles  were  accepted 
unanimously.  "I  have  gone  herein  with  an  upright 
heart,  to  prevent  a  breach,  seeming  indeed,  between 
the  Churches  of  England  and  Ireland." 

To  the  Articles  were  added  Canons  designed  to 
establish  the  Catholicism  of  the  Church,  and  there  was 
talk  of  the  establishment  of  a  High  Commission  to 
enforce  them.  But  such  measures  could  not  materially 
assist  an  unworthy  hierarchy.  The  episcopate  was 
therefore  enriched  by  learned  and  able  men — Bedell, 
Bramhall,  Chappell.  Then  began  that  line  of  dis- 
tinguished bishops  which  has  been  the  pride  of  the 
Irish  Church  to  this  day.  But  Strafford  and  Laud 
worked  below  as  well  as  above.    New  schools  were 


172 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


built,  and  new  endowments  given  to  education.  The 
financial  difficulty  was  the  greatest  which,  the  reformers 
had  to  meet.  In  Ulster  as  well  as  in  Connaught  the 
clergy  were  wretchedly  poor.  A  Commission  was  ap- 
pointed to  remedy  the  evil.  But  the  great  work  of 
Laud  and  Strafford  was  the  restoration  of  the  impro- 
priated tithes.  "  That  in  the  great  cause  of  the  im- 
propriations which  are  yet  remaining  in  his  Majesty's 
gift,"  wrote  Laud  on  April  30,  1633,  "and  which  he 
is  most  willing  to  give  back  to  God  and  His  service, 
you  will  do  whatsoever  may  justly  be  done  for  the 
honour  and  service  of  your  two  great  masters,  God 
and  the  King,  that  you  would  countenance  and  assist 
the  Lord  Primate  of  Armagh  in  all  things  belonging: 
to  this  great  service ;  and  particularly  for  the  procuring 
of  a  true  and  just  valuation  of  them,  that  the  King 
may  know  what  he  gives  to  the  Church.  I  pray,  my 
Lord,  be  hearty  in  this,  for  I  shall  think  myself  very 
happy  if  God  be  pleased  to  spare  my  life  to  see  this 
business  ended."  The  great  desire  of  the  Archbishop 
was  fulfilled,  and  the  whole  of  the  tithes  impropriated 
by  the  Crown  were  restored  to  the  Church. 

It  is  a  curious  instance  of  the  readiness  of  his  accusers 
to  take  up  any  stone  to  cast  at  him,  that  on  his  trial 
this  matter  of  the  impropriations  was  styled  "  robbing 
the  King."  The  answer  was  easy,  as  was  that  to  the 
complaint  of  the  increase  of  Popery.  "  Is  there  a  better 
way  to  hinder  this  growth  than  to  place  an  able  clergy 
among  the  inhabitants  ?  Can  an  able  clergy  be  had 
without  means  ?  Is  any  means  fitter  than  impro- 
priations restored  ?  My  Lords,  I  did  this  as  holding 
it  the  best  means  to  keep  down  Popery,  and  to 
advance  the  Protestant  religion.    And  I  wish  with 


IRELAND 


173 


all  my  heart  I  had  been  able  to  do  it  sooner,  before 
so  many  impropriations  were  gotten  from  the  Crown 
into  private  hands." 

Private  persons  were  not  so  amenable  to  the  Arch- 
bishop's or  the  Deputy's  influence.  "  I  foresee,"  said 
Strafford,  "  this  is  so  universal  a  disease  that  I  shall 
incur  a  number  of  men's  displeasure  of  the  best  rank 
among  them.  But  were  I  not  better  to  lose  these 
for  God  Almighty's  sake  than  lose  Him  for  theirs?" 

In  spite  of  the  difficulties  Strafford's  "  thorough  " 
succeeded,  and  he  left  the  Irish  Church  richer  by 
£30,000  a  year  than  he  found  it.  "  Thorough  "  in  its 
conduct  as  well  as  in  its  aims  the  policy  certainly  was. 
The  Earl  of  Cork,  whose  huge  family  tomb  blocked 
up  the  east  end  of  S.  Patrick's  where  the  altar  should 
have  been,  had  to  remove  it  in  spite  of  all  his  protests 
and  his  indignation.  He  wrote  to  Laud  :  the  reply 
was  courteous,  but  firm.  In  a  few  weeks  Strafford 
reported  that  the  Earl  had  taken  the  whole  of  it  away. 
"  How  he  means  to  dispose  of  it  I  know  not ;  but  up 
it  is  put  in  boxes,  as  if  it  were  marchpanes  and  ban- 
queting stuffs  going  down  to  the  christening  of  my 
young  master  in  the  country."  The  bishops  were  no 
more  gently  treated  than  the  lay  lords  when  they 
opposed  the  Deputy's  policy.  When  Bishop  Adair  of 
Killala  approved  the  Covenant  he  was  deposed. 

A  policy  like  this  had  undoubted  defects.  It  had 
all  the  appearance  of  Erastianism,  though  it  is  true 
that  Laud's  policy  was  never  to  subordinate  the  Church 
to  the  State.  Its  aim  was  to  give  the  Irish  Church 
just  that  form  of  restorative  stimulus  which  it  had 
never  received — a  "  goodly  and  thorough  Preformation." 
But  unhappily  the  projects  for  Church  reform  were 


174 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


linked  to  those  baleful  theories  of  English  political 
action  which  Elizabeth  had  made  traditional  in  Ireland, 
which  the  Stewarts  rather  modified  than  abandoned, 
and  which  Cromwell  and  William  II I.  were  to  make 
a  cause  of  irreconcilable  international  hatred.  Laud 
had  to  act  in  Ireland  through  the  arm  of  the  State, 
and  his  Church  policy  thus  became  identified  in 
appearance  with  the  most  questionable  of  the  proceed- 
ings of  Wentworth.  Yet  all  through,  the  Archbishop, 
though  acting  through  the  State,  felt  his  work  to  be 
stifled  by  it.  The  Canon  Law,  he  complained  to  the 
Bishop  of  Kilmore,  had  "  been  so  blasted  in  these 
kingdoms  "  that  almost  any  ill  custom  contrary  to  it 
will  have  strength  to  prevail;  and  to  Strafford,  "as 
for  the  Church,  it  is  so  bound  up  in  the  forms  of  the 
Common  Law  that  it  is  not  possible  for  me,  or  for  any 
man,  to  do  that  good  which  he  would  do  or  is  bound 
to  do.  For  your  lordship  sees,  no  man  clearer,  that 
they  which  have  gotten  so  much  power  over  the 
Church  will  not  let  go  their  hold :  they  have  indeed, 
fangs  with  a  witness,  whatsoever  I  was  once  said  in 
passion  to  have." 

Still,  in  spite  of  its  defects,  the  policy  was  not  with- 
out good  result.  It  raised  the  tone  of  the  Irish  clergy, 
as  well  as  re-endowed  the  Church.  It  did  something, 
though  but  little,  to  stem  that  torrent  of  Puritanism,  the 
fear  of  which  did  so  much  to  arouse  the  terrible  revolt 
of  1641. 

From  Ireland  to  Scotland  in  the  seventeenth  century 
is  a  far  cry.  Across  the  Tweed  there  was  no  phantom 
of  English  ascendency  to  preserve,  no  traditional  blood 
feud  to  overcome.  The  nation  was  proud  and  jealous 
of  its  independence :  neither  barons,  clergy,  nor  people 


SCOTLAND 


175 


could  be  hectored  into  submission.  Above  all,  it  had 
undergone  a  Reformation  which,  whether  godly  or  not, 
was  unmistakably  thorough,  and  the  Reformation  had 
produced  a  hierarchy  more  powerful  and  despotic  than 
England  had  ever  known,  and  fostered  a  type  of 
character  which  was  strange  and  repugnant  to  men  of 
Southern  race. 

There  can  be  no  better  introduction  to  the  Scots 
troubles  in  which  Laud  was  so  prominent  an  actor  than 
the  words  of  Clarendon,  which,  though  not  strictly 
accurate,  show  so  clearly  the  strength,  and  the  limit- 
ations, of  the  great  outburst  of  Scots  feeling.  "  The 
Scotch  nation,"  he  says,  "  how  capable  soever  it  was  of 
being  led  by  some  great  men  and  misled  by  the  clergy, 
would  have  been  corrupted  by  neither  into  a  barefaced 
rebellion  against  their  King,  whose  person  they  loved 
and  reverenced  his  government;  nor  could  they  have 
been  wrought  upon  towards  the  lessening  the  one  or 
the  other  by  any  other  suggestions  or  infusions,  than 
such  as  should  make  them  jealous  or  apprehensive  of  a 
design  to  introduce  Popery;  their  whole  religion  con- 
sisting in  an  entire  detestation  of  Popery,  in  believing 
the  Pope  to  be  Antichrist,  and  hating  perfectly  the 
persons  of  all  papists — and  I  doubt  all  others  who  did 
uot  hate  them." 

Interesting  and  significant  though  the  history  of  the 
religious  change  iu  Scotland  is  throughout,  we  need  not 
look  back  further  than  the  beginning  of  the  century  to 
see  the  particular  set  of  circumstances  with  which 
Charles  and  Laud  had  to  deal. 

James's  earlier  years  had  proved  to  the  full  the 
difficulties  which  the  Reformation  had  introduced  into 
Scots  politics.    "  Presbytery,"  said  the  King — it  was 


176 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


the  result  of  many  years'  bitter  experience — "agreetb 
as  well  with  monarchy  as  God  and  the  devil."  In  1599, 
after  years  of  labour  and  intrigue,  he  appointed  three 
ministers  to  vote  in  Parliament  with  the  title  of 
bishops.  Step  by  step,  with  infinite  patience,  varied  by 
sudden  fits  of  masterful  energy,  he  proceeded  till  he  had 
obtained  the  consent  of  various  packed  Assemblies  to 
the  appointment  of  "  constant  moderators "  of  the 
Assemblies,  officers  of  ecclesiastical  status  whose  position 
should  be  permanent :  these  were  the  titular  bishops. 
From  this  the  transition  to  a  legal  episcopacy  was  no 
great  matter.  In  1610,  an  Assembly  at  Glasgow  gave 
to  these  officers  power  to  excommunicate,  and  to 
institute  and  deprive,  and  directed  that  oaths  of 
obedience  to  them  should  be  taken  by  those  appointed 
to  benefices.  The  time  was  come  to  add  to  their  posi- 
tion the  weight  of  the  apostolic  sanction.  To  this  end 
Spottiswoode,  Archbishop  of  Glasgow,  Lamb,  Bishop  of 
Brechin,  and  Hamilton,  Bishop  of  Galloway,  were  sum- 
moned to  England,  and  received  consecration  by  the 
hands  of  Abbot,  Andrewes,  Neile,  and  Parry.  On  their 
return  to  Scotland  they  consecrated  other  bishops,  and 
Scotland  again  had  an  apostolic  ministry.  For  the 
time  the  King's  action  provoked  no  open  resistance. 
"  The  new  bishops,"  says  the  Presbyterian  Calderwood, 
"  were  become  so  awful  with  their  grandeur  and  the 
King's  assistance,  that  there  was  little  resistance  to 
them,  howbeit  great  murmuring  and  malcontentment." 

The  Scots  Church  could  not,  however,  be  regarded 
to  be  yet  in  happy  plight.  James  desired  to  provide 
for  the  permanent  endowment  of  the  clergy  who  had 
been  stripped  and  spoiled  by  the  greedy  lords  who 
carried  through  the  Reformation ;  and  he  hoped  to 


SCOTLAND 


177 


give  the  Church  a  bond  of  union  in  a  new  liturgy. 
In  1617  he  succeeded  in  the  former  aim.  He  procured 
the  settlement  of  a  regular  stipend  upon  the  ministers, 
and  by  securing  local  paj7ments  freed  the  clergy  from  the 
precarious  charity  of  an  impoverished  general  fund. 
Scotland  had  suffered  the  worst  that  Disestablishment 
brings  with  it.  James  again  brought  religious  minis- 
trations within  the  reach  of  all.  His  second  intention 
was  not  so  easily  carried  out.  Few  would  now  question 
either  James's  sagacity  or  his  good  intentions,  but  all 
must  admit  the  rashness  of  his  measures.  His  methods 
were  thoroughly  Erastian.  Nothing  more  intolerable  to 
Scots  sentiment  could  be  conceived,  nor  anything  more 
certain  in  the  long  run  to  cause  the  failure  of  the 
scheme.  Thus  early  indeed  we  may  see  at  work  that 
fatal  characteristic  of  the  ecclesiastical  policy  of  the 
later  Stewarts — its  inseparable  connection  with  the 
aims  and  the  machinery  of  the  State.  The  real  cause 
of  the  failure  of  the  policy  of  James,  of  Charles,  and  of 
Laud,  when  it  was  applied  to  the  Scots  Church,  was 
not  its  opposition  to  the  popular  will — for  there  are 
not  wanting  signs  that  the  people  were  becoming  re- 
conciled to  Episcopacy  and  Church  order1 — but  the  fact 
that  it  was  forced  upon  the  ministers,  who  had  become 
the  real  leaders  of  the  hardy  Scots,  by  the  power  of  the 
autocratic  State,  and  that  a  power  now  coming  to  the 
nation  with  a  more  and  more  foreign  aspect.  Typical 
of  James's  measures  was  an  act  introduced  into  the 
Scots  Parliament  in  1617,  to  provide  that  "whatever 
his  Majesty  should  determine  in  the  external  govern- 
ment of  the  Church,  with  the  advice  of  the  archbishops, 

1  See  Mr.  Sprott's  valuable  introduction  to  his  Scottish  Lituraies, 
dc.  (Edinb.  1871),  p.  lxvii. 

N 


178 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


bishops,  and  a  competent  number  of  the  ministry, 
should  have  the  force  of  law."  That  he  was  forced  to 
withdraw  it  should  have  taught  the  King  wisdom,  but 
he  marched  on  to  the  destruction  of  his  whole  system. 

Various  tentative  steps  were  taken  towards  the  ad- 
mission of  a  liturgy.  The  Articles  of  Perth — which 
were  passed  by  the  Assembly  under  the  strongest 
pressure  from  the  Crown — provided  for  kneeling  at 
the  Holy  Eucharist,  and  for  the  permissive  restoration 
of  private  baptism  and  communion  for  the  sick.  Con- 
firmation and  the  observance  of  festivals  also  resumed 
place  in  the  decent  order  of  the  Church. 

After  this,  a  service-book  was  compiled,  but  was  not 
enforced.  James  became  fully  occupied  by  his  English 
difficulties,  by  foreign  intrigues  and  Parliamentary 
opposition ;  and  it  was  not  till  his  son  turned  his 
attention  to  the  northern  kingdom  that  the  Church 
in  Scotland  underwent  any  further  changes  at  the 
hands  of  those  who  would  bring  her  to  their  own 
model. 

When  Charles  visited  Edinburgh  in  1633,  his  fixed 
intent  wras  to  introduce  a  service-book.  Laud  accom- 
panied him  as  Dean  of  the  Chapel  Royal.  It  was  not 
his  first  visit  to  Scotland.  In  1617  he  attended  Neile 
as  one  of  his  chaplains  when  James  went  north.  He 
then  made  acquaintance  with  the  chief  Churchmen, 
notably  Dr.  Forbes,  who  in  1633  became  Bishop  of 
Edinburgh.  He  was  a  witness  of  all  the  proceedings 
of  the  Perth  Assembly,  but  left  no  record  of  his  im- 
pressions. Even  in  that  short  visit  he  had  aroused 
indignation,  by  wearing  a  surplice  at  the  funeral  of  one 
of  the  King's  Scots  Guards. 

He  came  now  with  a  mind  made  up,  like  the  King, 


SCOTLAND 


179 


to  bring  the  Scots  Church  into  complete  harmony  with 
the  English.  "  The  worst  thought  I  had,"  he  said  at 
his  trial,  when  they  charged  him  with  plotting  against 
the  Kirk,  "  was  to  wish  it  like  the  English ;  and  so 
much  the  better  as  it  would  please  God  to  make  it." 
Yet  he  was  far  from  proceeding  precipitately.  The 
King  was  crowned  in  Holy  Rood  with  solemn  cere- 
monial,1 and  Laud  turned  back  a  bishop  who  disobeyed 
the  King's  order  to  wear  his  "  whites."  The  Scots  saw 
a  dignified  service  and  heard  a  fixed  liturgy.  There 
was  no  more. 

Then  came  the  demand  for  Canons.  How  was  the 
Church  to  be  governed  without  rules  ?  The  Scots 
bishops  drew  up  Canons,  and  by  the  King's  direction 
sent  them  to  Laud.  He  revised  them,  but,  as  he  was 
careful  to  declare  at  his  trial,  with  Juxon's  aid.  There 
was,  indeed,  no  reason  why  he  should  be  anxious  to 
work  alone  at  the  matter.  His  letters  to  the  Scots 
bishops  show  him  eager  that  the  work  should  be  theirs, 
not  his  :  yet  as  to  the  lines  on  which  it  should  proceed 
he  was  clear  and  firm.  The  bishops,  indeed,  were 
ready  to  lead,  not  to  follow  him  :  it  was  the  people  to 
whom  the  proposals  were  anathema.  The  Scots'  charges 
against  him  at  his  trial,  descending  to  the  mere  child- 
ishness of  details  in  these  Canons,  show  how  deep  was 
the  divergence  concerning  matters  about  which  it  would 
now  seem  the  veriest  trifling  to  wrangle. 

The  Archbishop  of  S.  Andrews  and  a  number  of 
the  bishops  writing  to  him  in  1635  2  say,  "  They  have 

1  I  have  not  space  to  discuss  the  interesting  details  of  the 
coronation  (see  Corou.  of  Charles  I.,  Henry  Bradshaw  Society, 
p.  xxvi  sqq.).  Laud  was  admitted  of  the  Scots  Privy  Council 
June  15,  1633  (Gal.  State  Papers,  1633-4,  p.  100). 

2  Gal.  State  Papers,  1635,  p.  4. 


180 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


made  a  further  progress  than  could  have  been  expected 
in  many  years,  and  hope  to  still  go  forward,  if  the 
Archbishop  do  return  in  health  and  life."  Laud 
showed  no  desire  to  hurry  the  progress;  he  endorsed 
the  letter.    "  Conformity  must  be  a  work  of  time." 

'•'  Our  prelates  have  not  the  boldness  to  trouble  us  in 
their  canons,  with  altars,  fonts,  chancels,  reading  of  a 
long  liturgy  before  sermons,  etc.  But  Canterbury  is 
punctual  and  peremptory  in  all  these  " — was  a  serious 
charge  in  the  eyes  of  his  accusers.  His  answer,  with 
its  quaint  ironical  humour,  would  seem  to  them  but 
unseemly  jesting.1 

"  What's  the  crime  which  '  prelates  had  not  the 
boldness  to  trouble  you  with,'  and  in  which  Canterbury, 
that  strange  man,  is  so  '  punctual  and  peremptory '  ? 
0 !  grave  crimen  Cede  Caesar !  Tis  a  charge  indeed, 
indeed — a  mighty  charge  !  a  '  novation '  of  above 
thirteen  hundred  years  old." 

"  I  was  no  '  master  of  this  work,' "  he  said,  "  but  a 
servant  to  it,  and  commanded  thereunto  by  his  sacred 
Majesty."2  Such,  and  such-like,  "  wicked  intentions" 
of  "  Canterbury  and  Ross  "  did  not  escape  comment  at 
the  time. 

The  next  step  was  the  issue  of  a  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  It  was  a  necessary  consequence  of  what  had 
gone  before  :  and  here  again  the  work  was  that  of 
the  Scots  bishops.  "  I  ever  did  desire,"  said  Laud 
very  truly,  "  it  might  come  to  them  with  their  own 
liking  and  approbation.  Nay,  I  did  ever,  upon  all 
occasions,  call  upon  the  Scottish  bishops  to  do  nothing 
in  this  particular  but  by  warrant  of  law.  And  further, 
I  professed  unto  them  before  his  Majesty  that  though 
1  Works,  iii.  327.  2  Ibid.,  iii.  317. 


SCOTLAND 


181 


I  had  obeyed  his  commands  in  helping  to  order  that 
book,  yet,  since  I  was  ignorant  of  the  laws  of  that 
kingdom,  I  would  have  nothing  at  all  to  do  with  the 
manner  of  introducing  it,  but  left  that  wholly  to  them 
who  do,  or  should,  understand  both  that  Church  and 
their  laws."  1  Yet  the  book,  though  it  was  the  Scots' 
in  beginning,  was  certainly  largely  Laud's  in  carrying 
out,  and  received  the  most  careful  revision  from  him  and 
the  bishops  of  his  opinion.  His  own  copy  of  the  book, 
now  in  the  library  of  the  city  of  Norwich — another  copy 
is  at  Lambeth — contains  his  carelul  interlineations.  It 
was  to  be  "  as  near  that  of  England  as  miidit  be."  Yet 

o  o 

the  bishops  themselves  desired  that  there  should  be  differ- 
ences, both  because  it  seemed  easier  to  content  the 
Scots  with  a  book  which  was  their  own  than  with  an 
attempt  to  introduce  the  English  form,  and  because  the 
"  order  of  the  prayers  "  was  the  better  and  the  "  more 
agreeable  to  the  use  in  the  primitive  Church."  No  doubt 
a  chief  cause  of  the  failure  of  this  ill-fated  endeavour 
was  the  mistaken  way  in  which  it  was  attempted  to 
carry  it  through.  Again  and  again,  in  his  letters  to 
Strafford,  Laud  complains  of  the  folly  and  perverseness 
of  the  Scots  bishops,  and  of  the  traitorous  counsels  of 
the  King's  political  advisers  in  Scotland.  Indeed,  till 
the  time  when  it  should  have  been  publicly  used,  all 
went  smoothly.  In  May  1637  Laud  was  writing  to 
the  city  of  Edinburgh  as  to  the  care  of  S.  Giles's  and 
to  other  church  buildings.2 

It  was  not  till  July  23,  1637,  when  the  service  book 
was  used  for  the  first  time  in  S.  Giles's  Cathedral,  that  the 

1  Works,  iii.  336. 

2  This  letter,  which  is  in  my  possession,  was  printed  in  Eiuj. 
Hist.  Ilev.,  October  1892. 


182 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


tumult  burst  forth.  The  scene  is  historic,  though  some 
of  its  details  are  apocryphal.  Amid  the  crash  of  broken 
windows,  and  the  hurtling  of  stools,  the  service  was 
completed  :  but  the  next  day  its  use  was  suspended  till 
the  King's  will  was  known.  Charles's  obstinacy — "I 
mean  to  be  obeyed  " — had  no  effect  against  the  rising 
indignation  of  the  Scots.  It  became  more  than  ever 
clear  to  them  that  this  new  book  was  being  forced 
upon  them  by  the  State  power  and  by  the  English 
government.  Disturbance  became  riot,  and  riot  rebel- 
lion. The  Common  Prayer  was  met  by  the  Covenant 
— and  the  national  war  broke  out,  which  swept  away 
every  vestige  of  ecclesiastical  order,  which  set  alight 
the  smouldering  discontent  in  England,  and  which,  in 
its  conclusion  at  the  treaty  of  Ripon,  left  Charles, 
for  the  time  at  least,  powerless  in  the  hands  of  his 
opponents. 

The  rising  of  Scots  nationalism  was  against  Eras- 
tianism  and  against  England :  but  it  was  much  more 
— it  was  a  genuine  assertion  of  extreme  Protestant 
doctrine,  which  had  won  its  way  to  the  minds  and 
hearts  of  the  people,  against  the  danger,  which  their 
experience  did  not  lead  them  to  consider  illusory,  of 
Romanism.  Primitive  Christianity  was  too  near  Rome 
to  be  safe — and  the  Prayer-Book  itself  took  its  char- 
acteristics from  the  liturgies  of  the  earliest  days  of  the 
Christian  past. 

Men  had  now  had  time  to  look  clearly  on  doctrine  and 
worship,  apart  from  the  storm  and  stress  of  the  Reforma- 
tion movements.  A  school  of  liturgiologists  had  arisen,  to 
whom  the  English  forms  were  meagre  and  incomplete, 
and  to  Avhom  it  seemed  possible,  without  going  beyond 
what  the  English  Prayer-Book  admitted,  to  present  to  the 


SCOTLAND 


18.3 


ecclesiastics  and  antiquaries  of  Europe  a  liturgy  which 
should  be  deficient  in  no  primitive  expression  of 
Catholic  truth.  Thus  in  the  Eucharistic  service  stress 
was  laid  upon  the  Christian  sacrifice.  "  The  priest 
shall  offer  up  and  place  the  bread  and  wine  prepared 
for  the  Sacrament  on  the  Lord's  Table,"  says  Laud's 
MS. ;  and  the  offering  is  a  memorial  of  the  Lord's 
"precious  death  and  sacrifice."  And  the  primitive 
invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  restored  at  consecra- 
tion :  "  Hear  us,  0  merciful  Father,  we  most  humbly 
beseech  Thee,  and  of  Thy  Almighty  goodness  vouchsafe 
so  to  bless  and  sanctify  these  Thy  gifts  and  creatures 
of  bread  and  wine,  that  they  may  be  unto  us  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Thy  most  dearly  beloved  Son."  So  also 
no  loophole  for  Zwinglianism  is  left  in  the  words  of 
administration  :  the  second  clause  of  the  English  form, 
put  into  the  Second  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  VI.,  is 
excised.  These  alterations,  and  such  as  these,  un- 
doubtedly brought  the  service  more  into  accord  with 
primitive  usage ;  and  that  seemed  to  Laud  a  sufficient 
authority.1  He  was  never  able  to  understand  the 
position  of  those  who  wished  to  escape  from  primi- 
tive tradition  and  Church  order.  To  him  the  past 
was  the  very  ground  of  his  belief  and  his  worship; 
forms  were  supports,  not  bondages.    The  Scots'  view 

1  At  Lis  trial  lie  said,  "Though  I  shall  not  find  fault  with  the 
order  of  the  prayers  as  they  stand  in  the  Communion-book  of 
England  (for,  God  be  thanked,  'tis  well),  yet  if  a  comparison 
must  be  made,  I  do  think  the  order  of  the  prayers,  as  now  they 
stand  in  the  Scottish  Liturgy,  to  be  the  better  and  more  agree- 
able to  use  in  the  primitive  Church  ;  and,  I  believe,  they  which 
are  learned  will  acknowledge  it"  ( Works,  iii.  344).  Again,  "As 
for  the  oblation  of  the  elements,  that's  fit  and  proper  ;  and  I  am 
sorry  for  my  part  that  it  is  not  in  the  book  of  England"  (Ibid., 
iii.  359). 


184 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


was  utterly  opposed  to  this :  they  had  found  a  new 
world  of  religious  thought,  and  they  clung  to  its  ex- 
pression with  irresistible  tenacity.  But  the  Scots 
Revolution  was  not  wholly  religious.  It  was  a  popular 
uprising  inspired  by  fierce  hatred  against  the  Royal 
power,  which  sought  to  hurry  the  people  along  a  path 
which  they  were  not  yet  prepared  to  tread.  It  was  an 
aristocratic  movement  led  by  selfish  politicians  who 
dreaded  the  strengthening  of  the  monarchy.  It  was 
the  expression  of  the  feeling,  narrow  but  intense,  of 
the  clergy,  who  had  become  the  masters  of  the  people. 
"  Of  liberty  of  thought  these  Scottish  preachers  neither 

knew  anything  nor  cared  to  know  anything  

Spiritual  and  mental  freedom  would  have  one  day  to 
be  learnt  from  England." 1  Thus  the  antagonism  of 
the  Scots  to  the  Laudian  movement  was  twofold.  It 
was  to  them  at  once  too  conservative  in  its  foundations 
and  too  liberal  in  its  outlook.  The  very  merits  of  its 
ideal,  no  less  than  the  glaring  defects  of  the  methods  by 
which  men  sought  to  enforce  it,  caused  its  unhesitating 
and  unalterable  rejection. 

An  interesting  illustration  of  Scots  feeling  is  to  be 
found  in  a  long  letter  of  the  Earl  of  Argyll  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  dated  February  28,  1639.2 
"  With  your  lordship's  favour,"  he  says,  "  I  believe  you 
shall  find  that  the  complaint  of  the  Presbytery  your 
lordship  mentions,  which  we  call  our  Church  or  General 
Assembly,  is  concerning  very  essential  differences  be- 
twixt the  Reformed  Church  and  that  of  Rome ;  and 
so  far  only  against  bishops  as  they  transgress  the  laws 

1  Gardiner,  Hist.  Engl.,  vol.  viii.  p.  374. 

2  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Report  XII.,  App.,  Part  2,  Coke  MSS., 
p.  213,  in  answer  to  a  letter  of  Laud's  of  November  25,  1638. 


SCOTLAND 


185 


and  lawful  constitutions  of  this  Church  and  kingdom. 
.  ...  So  with  your  lordship's  good  leave,  I  must  say 
still  your  lordship  is  mistaken  if  you  think  the  book 
that  was  offered  and  pressed  here  was  only  the  English 
service,  for  in  the  very  reading  any  man  may  see  the 
contrary.  Yet  truly  I  think  all  his  Majesty's  subjects 
ought  to  thank  God  for  his  Majesty's  paternal  care 
of  his  own  children,  and  as  all  (I  hope)  do  acknow- 
ledge it  to  proceed  from  his  Majesty's  own  goodness, 
so  I  believe  they  are  the  loather  to  come  under  the 
hands  of  indiscreet  pedants  or  rude  task-masters,  that 
want  the  affection  and  moderation  of  a  father."  The 
letter  is  a  plain  enough  direction  to  the  English  to 
mind  their  own  business.  It  bases  the  Scots  forms 
of  worship  and  Church  order  on  Scripture  alone.  "  It 
seems  they  desire  rather  to  be  like  Moses,  who  would 
not  suffer  any  to  remain  in  Egypt,  lest  it  should  give 
occasion  to  return." 

In  Scotland,  where  the  aim  rather  than  the  measures 
had  been  his,  Laud  saw  for  the  first  time  the  decisive 
failure  of  his  policy.  His  gradual  awakening  to  the 
failure  is  to  be  traced  almost  pathetically  in  his  letters. 
Most  of  all  was  he  distressed  that  the  good  intentions 
of  his  master  should  be  mistaken  and  misliked.  Charles 
clung  to  the  Episcopal  order  to  the  last :  he  would  cut 
down  their  powers,  circumscribe  their  action,  till  they 
became  like  the  Culdee  bishops  whom  the  Scots  had 
known  of  old  in  their  earlier  home ;  but  he  would  not 
consent  to  their  abolition.  This  was  no  struggle  for 
the  appearance  of  victory — it  was  a  stand  for  the 
essentials  of  the  Catholic  Church.  So  it  appeared  to 
Charles  and  to  Laud :  but  the  time  was  past  to  save 
anything  from  the  wreck,  and  the  triumph  of  the 


186  WILLIAM  LAUD 

Scots  army  but  foreshadowed  the  fate  of  the  English 
Church. 

Misfortune  dogged  every  step  which  Laud  took  in 
Scotland  and  Ireland.  Yet  the  completeness  of  the 
failure  should  not  blind  us  to  the  greatness  of  the  aim. 
He  longed  to  see  a  great  communion  recognizing  its 
unity  in  the  Church,  as  the  kingdoms  that  owned  the 
sway  of  James  and  Charles  recognized  the  links  which 
bound  them  together.  But  when  political  bonds  were 
snapping  it  was  no  time  to  knit  with  ecclesiastical  ties. 
What  earlier  or  later  in  the  history  of  the  kingdoms 
might  have  won  success,  was  in  the  seventeenth  century 
at  best  but  a  visionary  ideal.  Something  to  oppose 
to  the  menacing  ostentation  of  the  Roman  obedience 
was  what  Laud  sought — a  great  Anglican  unity  firm 
in  the  faith  of  the  undivided  Church,  primitive  in 
doctrine,  apostolic  in  ministry,  restrained  and  sanctified 
in  individual  life.  It  was  a  great  ideal,  but  it  took 
no  count  of  the  times  and  men.  It  fell  inevitably,  yet 
even  while  it  fell  it  did  good  work.  The  Church  in 
Scotland  and  Ireland  to-day  cannot  but  look  back  to 
Laud  as  one  of  the  greatest  of  its  benefactors. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH. 

In  the  year  1640  Laud's  troubles  began  in  earnest. 
The  Scots  war  brought  to  a  head  all  the  discontent 
that  was  smouldering  in  England.  Political  grievances 
were  supported  by  religious  disorder;  and  the  insur- 
rection in  the  North,  which  so  boldly  placed  religion  in 
the  forefront  of  its  complaints,  drew  to  itself  the  sympathy 
of  all  those  in  England  who  were  seeking  to  change  the 
constitution  in  Church  or  State. 

The  bold  action  of  Convocation  in  1640  was  the  last 
effort  and  the  last  evidence  of  Laud's  power.  It  was 
significant  that  the  House  had  to  be  protected  in  its 
session  by  a  military  force,  and  that  Charles  hurried  on 
the  conclusion  of  its  proceedings  because  he  saw  the 
daily  increasing  animosity  which  was  aroused  by  the 
sight  of  the  guard  which  surrounded  the  Churchmen  in 
council.  When  the  King  left  for  the  North,  Laud,  with 
the  rest  of  the  Privy  Council  who  did  not  go  to  the  war, 
was  placed  in  charge  of  the  government,  "  with  orders 
by  all  good  ways  to  provide  for  the  safety  of  the 
kingdom  and  people."1    In  the  great  debate  of  the 

1  Cal.  State  Papers,  Sept.  2,  1640. 


188 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Council  on  Scots  affairs  four  months  before,  he  had 
spoken  boldly.  "  Tried  all  ways  and  refused  all  ways, 
by  the  law  of  God  you  should  have  subsistence,  and 
ought  to  have  it,  and  lawfully  to  take  it."  1  Lawfully, 
he  still  believed,  the  King  was  acting,  and  when 
Parliament  was  "  peevish,"  and  the  Scots  were  menacing, 
he  believed  that  there  were  other  means  by  which  the 
King  could  lawfully  obtain  supplies  besides  the  grant  of 
the  House  of  Commons. 

Every  day  the  troubles  thickened.  Laud  had  news 
of  a  Popish  plot,  which  one  Habernfeld  professed  to 
have  discovered,  and  which  he  revealed  to  the  English 
Ambassador  at  the  Hague  (Sir  William  Boswell). 
The  extraordinary  tissue  of  absurdities  which  the  story 
unfolded  was  not  too  strange  to  be  credible  to  a 
generation  which  still  remembered  the  Gunpowder  Plot. 
It  seemed  to  Laud  a  "  great  business," 2  and  Prynne, 
when  he  found  the  papers  at  Lambeth,  served  them  up 
in  his  own  style  as  an  accusation  against  the  Archbishop 
himself. 

The  difficulty  of  providing  for  the  troops,  the  increas- 
ing successes  of  the  Scots,  the  gallant  struggle  of 
Went  worth  against  overwhelming  odds,  and  the  intrigues 
and  self-seeking  which  marred  the  efforts  of  the  King's 
party, — all  were  felt  in  London,  and  Laud  shared  to  the 
full  in  the  troubles  and  the  unpopularity. 

Already  he  had  learnt  something  of  the  feeling  of 
London.  On  May  9,  when  Parliament  had  been  dissolved, 

1  Cal.  State  Papers.    Vane's  notes,  May  5,  1640. 

2  See  Cal.  State  Papers,  Sept.  11,  1640  ;  Oct.  5—15,  1640. 
Prynne's  Pome's  Masterpiece,  an  ingenious  falsification  of  the 
whole  story,  is  reprinted,  with  Laud's  MS.  notes,  in  his  Works,  iv. 
463  sqq. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


189 


and  Convocation  was  still  sitting,  a  paper  had  been 
posted  on  the  Exchange,  summoning  all  apprentices  to 
meet  the  next  holiday  in  S.  George's  Fields,  and  to 
sack  the  palace  at  Lambeth.  Laud  had  warning,  and 
the  next  day,  Sunday,  "  a  drum  was  beat  up  in  South- 
wark,  and  charge  given  to  the  train  band  there  to 
guard  the  Archbishop's  house."  1  About  twelve  or  one 
at  night  some  five  hundred  rioters  assembled,  but  after 
two  hours  were  unable  to  force  an  entrance,  "  and  God 
be  thanked,"  wrote  Laud  in  his  Diary,  "  I  had  no  harm." 
The  attempt,  however,  had  been  made,  and  was  widely 
talked  of.  It  was  reported  that  the  Archbishop  had 
been  "  compelled  to  take  a  grey  cloak  and  escape  over 
the  Thames." 2  He  had  indeed  slept  the  night  at 
Whitehall.  One  of  the  ringleaders  was  executed ;  but 
the  riots  continued.  The  White  Lion  prison  in  South- 
wark  was  broken  open,  and  prisoners  were  rescued  from 
thence  and  from  the  King's  Bench. 

The  Scots  as  they  entered  England  were  threatening 
vengeance  on  the  Archbishop  as  "  a  raging  tyrant  and 
blood-sucking  wolf."  3  The  prentices  were  again  being 
hired  to  fall  on  him  during  the  King's  absence,  by  fly- 
sheets  scattered  about  the  city.  And,  while  the  Great 
Council  of  Peers  was  debating  at  York,  and  when  the 
richer  citizens  of  London  were  coming  forward  to  aid 
the  King  with  money,  a  mob  of  "  near  two  thousand 
Brownists"  made  tumult  in  the  High  Commission 
Court,  then  sitting  in  S.  Paul's  "  because  of  the  trouble 
of  the  times."    They  "  tore  down  all  the  benches  in  the 

1  Woodford's  Diary,  in  Hist.  MSS.  Comm.,  Repwt  IX.i 
Appendix,  p.  498. 

2  Ibid. 

3  Letter  in  Prynne's  Hidden  Works  of  Darkness,  pp.  187-8. 


190 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Consistory,  and  cried  out  that  they  would  have  no 
bishop,  nor  no  High  Commission."  1 

From  that  time  the  end  was  near.  In  nothing  was 
the  popular  feeling  more  evident  than  in  the  enormous 
growth  of  broadsheets  and  pamphlets,  libels  and  ballads, 
that  were  issued  on  every  topic  of  current  affairs. 

As  early  as  1629  Laud  had  knowledge  of  the  bitter 
hatred  that  was  rising  against  him,  through  the  libels 
that  were  printed  and  circulated  through  the  land.  On 
March  29  he  wrote  in  his  Diary — "Two  papers  were 
found  in  the  Dean  of  Paul's  his  yard  before  his  house. 
The  one  was  to  this  effect,  concerning  myself:  Laud, 
look  to  thyself;  be  assured  thy  life  is  sought.  As  thou 
art  the  fountain  of  all  wickedness,  repent  thee  of  thy 
monstrous  sins,  before  thou  be  taken  out  of  the  world, 
etc.  And  assure  thyself,  neither  God  nor  the  world 
can  endure  such  a  vile  counsellor  to  live,  or  such  a 
whisperer ;  or  to  this  effect.  The  other  was  as  bad  as 
this,  against  the  Lord  Treasurer.  Mr.  Dean  delivered 
both  papers  to  the  King  that  night.  Lord,  I  am  a 
grievous  sinner;  but  I  beseech  Thee  deliver  my  soul 
from  them  that  hate  me  without  a  cause."  From  that 
day  letters  of  accusation  and  fly-sheets,  imputing  every 
kind  of  crime,  dogged  his  path.  His  Diary  records 
some  of  the  worst.  His  familiar  letters  comment  on 
them,  but  always  in  the  same  tone  of  sorrow  leather 
than  anger.  "The  best  is,"  be  writes  to  Strafford  in 
1636,  "  they  have  called  my  Master  by  the  worst  name 
they  have  given  me,  and  He  has  taught  me  how  to 
bear  it."  Two  years  later  it  is  the  same.  "Within 
this  fortnight  I  have  received  four  bitter  libels.  I  only 
tell  the  King  of  them,  and  put  them  in  my  pocket." 
1  Diary,  in  Works,  iii.  237. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


191 


"  All  to  Westminster :  newes  from  Elizium  " ;  "  Can- 
terburie's  Tooles,  or  Instruments  wherewith  he  hath 
effected  many  rare  feats  and  egregious  exploits,  as  is 
very  well  known,  and  notoriously  manifest  to  all  men. 
Discovering  his  projects  and  policies,  and  the  ends  and 
purposes  of  the  prelates  in  effecting  their  facinorous 
actions  and  enterprises  " ;  "  Rome  for  Canterbury,  or  a 
true  relation  of  the  Birth  and  Life  of  William  Laud  " ; 
"  Rome's  ABC  " ;  "  Canterbury's  Will " ;  "  Canterburie's 
Amazement,  or  the  Ghost  of  the  Young  Fellow  Thomas 
Bensted,  who  appeared  to  him  in  the  Tower " ;  "A 
Parallel  between  Thomas  Wolsey,  Archbishop  of  York, 
and  William  Laud,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  " ;  "  Can- 
terburie's Dreame  "  (a  vision  of  Wolsey) ;  "  Mercurie's 
Message,  or  the  Coppy  of  a  Letter  sent  to  William 
Laud,  late  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  now  prisoner  in 
the  Tower."  These  are  a  few  of  those  which  came  out 
in  1641.  The  list  is  endless.  Many  of  them  show  a 
coarse  humour  :  many  more  a  savage  bitterness.  It  is 
pathetic  to  see  them  in  Lambeth  Library,  carefully 
kept  and  noted,  with  the  date  and  manner  in  which 
they  reached  him.  They  became  so  common  that  he 
grew  to  treat  them  often  with  a  spice  of  their  own 
humour.  "  William  Laude — well  am  a  divil,"  says 
one  foolish  anagram.    The  Archbishop  wrote  below — 

"  He  y*  of  this  would  better  English  make, 
Shall  find  a  task  will  make  his  brain  to  ake." 

Perhaps  the  foulest  of  them  all — but  it  is  ill  setting 
precedence  in  such  a  matter — is  "  Canterbury's  Will, 
with  a  Serious  Conference  between  his  Scrivener  and 
him,"  printed  in  1641,  after  his  imprisonment,  which 
threatens  his  death  by  hanging,  and  makes  the  usual 


192 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


accusations  against  him.  "  Dost  thou  not  hear,"  he  is 
made  to  say,  "as  thou  walkest  along  the  streets,  how 
each  school-boy's  mouth  is  filled  with  a  Give  Little 
Land  to  the  Dcvill  ?  " 

Another,  of  no  little  interest,  is  "  The  Recantation 
of  the  Prelate  of  Canterbury,  being  his  last  Advice  to 
his  Brethren  the  Bishops  of  England  to  consider  his 
Fall,  observe  the  Times,  forsake  their  wayes,  and  to 
joyne  in  their  good  work  of  Reformation."  In  this 
Laud  is  made  to  confess  his  design  of  erecting  a 
hierarchy  which  should  rule  England,  and  sow  the 
seeds  of  Arminianism,  superstition,  and  Popery,  and  to 
give  himself  up  to  despair  and  penitence.  One  pas- 
sage, as  he  read  it  in  the  Tower,  may  have  well  startled 
him  by  the  confidence  with  which  it  predicted  that 
it  would  be  impossible  now  to  recover,  or  to  avoid  the 
extreme  penalty. 

"  We  have  already,"  he  was  made  to  say,  "  received 
sentence  from  the  House  of  Commons ;  their  wisdom 
and  justice  have  pronounced  the  people's  mind,  and 
denounced  the  kingdom's  pleasure.  And  though  the 
influence  of  some  frolick  faction  (now  fugitive  as  our 
hopes  are)  should  yet  a  little  prolong  the  life  of  our 
expectation,  and  entertain  us  with  a  possibility  of 
wrestling  through,  tell  me  if  ever  any  person  did  thrive 
being  once  condemned  by  them.  It  is  certainly  a 
great  loss,  not  to  have  the  Parliament's  affection,  and 
very  hard,  as  they  say,  to  sit  in  Rome  and  strive 
against  the  Pope.  No,  no,  Nature  and  Grace,  Time 
and  Fortune,  have  taken  such  a  good  course  to  destroy 
us,  that  it  is  impossible  we  can  be  saved  without  a 
miracle." 1 

1  P.  38.    For  this  interesting  libel  I  am  indebted  to  the  kind- 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


193 


The  writer  bad  indeed  hit  upon  the  reason  which 
made  escape  impossible.  Though  the  Commons  might 
be  compelled  by  the  pressure  of  military  and  civil 
difficulties  to  delay  for  years  the  settlement  of  their 
great  quarrel  with  the  Archbishop,  it  was  the  war  itself 
which  made  it  impossible  that  his  life  should  ulti- 
mately be  spared.  As  the  fratricidal  strife  more  and 
more  embittered  the  feelings  of  the  combatants,  the 
English  Erastians  becjan  to  feel,  as  the  Scots  had  lono; 
felt,  an  unquenchable  personal  hatred  against  the  great 
surviving  exponent  of  the  Stewart  policy  in  Church  and 
State,  while  those  who  might  have  preserved  his  life 
were  scattered  over  all  England  when  the  fatal  hour 
arrived.  Slowly  the  libellers  came  to  represent  the 
feelings  of  those  who  had  the  power  to  strike,  and  then 
Laud's  death  was  inevitable. 

But  to  return  to  the  period  when  the  popular  cries 
were  first  finding  expression  in  the  literature  of  the 
street.  Libels  such  as  these  were  constant  in  the 
autumn  of  1640.  Abroad  and  at  home  the  air  seemed 
full  of  omens  against  the  Archbishop.  He  was  still 
busy  with  his  works  of  generosity,  sending  the  last  of 
his  magnificent  gift  of  MSS.  to  his  loved  University. 
One  night  he  found  his  picture,  "taken  by  the  life  "  in 
Vandyke's  studio  if  not  entirely  by  his  own  hand,1 
"  fallen  down  upon  the  face  and  lying  on  the  lioor,  the 
string  being  broken  by  which  it  was  hanged  against 
the  wall."  Even  his  stalwart  heart  was  startled.  "  I 
am   almost  every  day  threatened  with  my  ruin  in 


ness  of  'A  Romish  Recusant.'  The  portrait  of  Laud  which  it 
contains  has  been  reproduced  as  the  frontispiece  of  his  own 
interesting  life  of  Laud. 

1  The  picture  still  hangs  at  Lambeth. 

o 


194 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Parliament,"  he  wrote;  "God  grant  this  be  no 
omen."  1 

The  Long  Parliament  met  on  Tuesday,  November  3. 
From  that  date  events  moved  quickly.  On  the  11th 
Strafford  was  impeached ;  on  December  4  Laud  was 
examined  as  to  his  friend's  speeches  in  the  Privy 
Council;  on  the  10th  Windebanke -fled ;  on  the  lGth 
the  new  Canons  were  condemned  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  and  Laud  was  named  as  the  author  of  them, 
and  in  the  House  of  Lords  the  Scots  Commissioners 
accused  him  by  name  as  "  an  incendiary."  On  Friday, 
December  18,  he  was  formally  impeached  of  High 
Treason  by  the  Commons,  and  charged  further  by 
the  Scots  Commissioners.  No  particular  articles  were 
alleged ;  these  it  was  said  should  follow  in  convenient 
time. 

Within  six  weeks  the  face  of  English  affairs  had 
been  completely  changed.  Charles  had  lost  his  two 
most  devoted  servants.  No  one  raised  a  finger  to  save 
them.  Terror  seemed  to  have  fallen  on  the  Court  as 
the  Commons  became  the  masters  of  the  State. 

Laud  was  committed  to  the  custody  of  the  Usher  of 
the  Black  Rod,  Mr.  Maxwell,  till  the  charges  against 
him  should  be  particularized.  He  was  allowed  to 
spend  a  few  hours  for  the  last  time  at  Lambeth,  taking 
a  few  books  and  materials  for  his  defence.  "  I  stayed 
at  Lambeth  till  the  evening,"  is  the  touching  entry  in 
his  Diary,  "  to  avoid  the  gazing  of  the  people.  I  went 
to  evening  prayer  in  my  chapel.  The  psalms  of  the 
day,  Psalms  93  and  94,  and  chapter  50  of  Esai,  gave 
me  great  comfort.  God  make  me  worthy  of  it,  and  fit 
to  receive  it.  As  I  went  to  my  barge,  hundreds  of  my 
1  Diary,  Works,  iii.  237. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH  195 


poor  neighbours  stood  there  and  prayed  for  my  safety 
and  return  to  my  house.  For  which  I  bless  God  and 
them."  He  had  some  little  talk  with  his  steward  and 
other  faithful  friends,  who  felt  with  him  the  comfort  of 
the  psalms  "  Dominus  regnavit"  and  "  Deus  ultionum"  : 
he  could  study  in  them  again  the  power  of  the 
Almighty  and  the  comforts  of  the  righteous.  "  Blessed 
is  the  man  whom  Thou  chastenest,  0  Lord,  and  teachest 
him  in  Thy  law :  that  Thou  inayest  give  him  patience 
in  time  of  adversity.  ...  In  the  multitude  of  the 
sorrows  that  I  had  in  my  heart  Thy  comforts  have 
refreshed  my  soul."  Every  day  after  he  read  over  these 
psalms  again  for  the  comfort  he  then  received. 

Special  prayer,  which  had  been  his  habitual  solace  in 
times  of  distress,  was  now  his  resort.  On  the  day  of 
his  imprisonment,  perhaps  during  his  last  hours  at 
Lambeth,  he  wrote  down  the  words  in  which  he 
commended  his  cause  to  God — "  O  eternal  God  and 
merciful  Father,  I  humbly  beseech  Thee  look  down 
upon  me  in  this  time  of  my  great  and  grievous  afflic- 
tion. Lord,  if  it  be  Thy  blessed  will, '  make  mine 
innocency  appear,  and  free  both  me  and  my  profession 
from  all  scandal  thus  raised  on  me.  And  howsoever,  if 
Thou  be  pleased  to  try  me  to  the  uttermost,  I  humbly 
beseech  Thee  give  me  full  patience,  proportionable 
comfort,  contentment  with  whatsoever  Thou  sendest, 
and  an  heart  ready  to  die  for  Thy  honour,  the  King's 
happiness,  and  the  Church's  preservation.  And  my 
zeal  to  these  is  all  the  sin  yet  known  to  me  in  this 
particular  for  which  I  thus  suffer.  Lord,  look  upon  me 
in  mercy,  and  for  the  merits  of  Jesus  Christ  pardon  all 
my  sins  many  and  great,  which  have  drawn  down  this 
judgment  upon  me ;  and  then  in  all  things  do  Thou 


19G 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


with  me  as  seems  best  in  Thine  own  eyes,  and  make  me 
not  only  patient  under,  but  thankful  for  whatsoever 
Thou  doest,  0  Lord  my  Strength  and  my  Redeemer. 
Amen."  1 

He  could  rest  at  peace  in  his  trust  in  God  and  with 
the  love  of  the  poor.  He  remained  for  ten  weeks  in 
the  custody  of  Maxwell,  "  during  which  time  he  gained 
so  much  on  the  good  opinion  of  the  gentlewoman  of 
the  house,  that  she  reported  him  to  some  of  her  gossips 
to  be  one  of  the  goodest  men  and  most  pious  souls, 
but  withal  one  of  the  silliest  fellows  to  hold  talk 
with  a  lady  that  ever  she  met  with  in  all  her 
life." 2  In  the  house  of  Black  Rod  he  would  hear 
all  that  was  happening  without;  and  strange  news 
indeed  it  must  have  seemed  to  one  who  had  never 
understood  how  the  times  Avere  moving.  He  was  fined 
£500  for  his  imprisonment  of  Sir  Robert  Howard,3  and 
made  to  pay  the  money  at  once.  Prynne,  Burton,  and 
Bastwick  were  released  and  received  with  triumph  in 
London.  Williams  was  set  at  liberty,  and  "  more 
honoured  by  the  Lords  and  Commons  than  ever  any 
of  his  order,  his  person  looked  upon  as  sacred,  his 
words  deemed  as  oracles." 4  Changes  among  the 
judges,  resolutions  against  ship-money,  orders  on  public 
worship,  "  root  and  branch  "  propositions,  and  the  signs 
of  severance  between  the  men  who  had  been  united 
when  the  Parliament  began — these  might  cause  hope 
and  fear  to  alternate  day  by  day  in  Laud's  ever  buoyant 
mind. 

At  last,  on  February  20,  1640,  fourteen  articles  were 

1  Works,  iii.  84. 

2  Heylin,  Cyprianus  Anglicus,  p.  405. 

3  See  above,  p.  102. 

4  Heylin,  p.  464. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


IDT 


brought  up  by  the  Commons  against  him,  and  he  was 
sent  for  to  the  bar  of  the  Lords  to  hear  them.  He 
made  a  spirited  reply.  False  he  was  declared  to  be 
to  God,  the  King,  and  the  people ;  and  that  with  no 
particular  proof  but  a  general  accusation.  "  It  is  not 
possible  for  any  man,"  he  answered,  "  to  be  true  to  the 
King,  as  King,  that  shall  be  found  treacherous  to  the 
State  established  by  law,  and  work  to  the  subversion  of 
the  people."  Most  nearly  of  all  did  he  feel  it  that  he 
should  be  charged  with  falseness  in  religion :  "  but  for 
corruption  in  the  least  degree  I  fear  no  accuser  that 
will  speak  the  truth." 

The  articles  touched  upon  every  point  of  the  policy 
in  Church  or  State  that  was  associated  with  his  name. 
He  had  subverted  the  fundamental  laws.  "  What  were 
they?"  was  his  answer;  and  he  stood,  as  always,  on 
the  judgment  of  the  lawyers  themselves  in  each  case. 
He  had,  it  was  said,  procured  the  publication  of 
assertions  of  arbitrary  power ;  he  had  perverted 
justice  in  the  law-courts;  he  had  taken  bribes  and 
sold  justice ;  he  had  traitorously  published  canons  con- 
trary to  the  King's  prerogative  and  the  people's  rights ; 
he  had  assumed  a  papal  and  tyrannical  power  in  con- 
tempt of  the  Royal  Supremacy';  he  had  endeavoured  to 
alter  God's  true  religion  by  law  established  in  the 
realm,  and  set  up  popish  superstition  and  idolatry ;  he 
had  abused  the  power  and  patronage  given  him,  and 
the  licensing  of  books;  he  had  confederated  with  Jesuits, 
and  deprived  godly  ministers ;  he  had  endeavoured  to 
cause  dissensions  between  the  Church  of  England  and 
'  other  reformed  Churches";  he  had  stirred  up  strife 
between  England  and  Scotland ;  and  he  had  laboured 
to  incense  the  King  against  the  people  and  the  people 


198 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


against  the  King  : — and  all  these  charges  were  made  to 
sound  the  more  grievous  by  the  addition  of  the  word 
"traitorously"  to  each. 

Laud  may  well  have  been  astonished  at  the  list,  as  it 
is  plain  he  was.  Yet  he  answered  with  courage  and 
patience  to  each  article,  premising  nevertheless  that 
general  charges  were  worthless,  and  that  he  could 
reply  in  detail  to  any  particular  evidence  or  allegation. 

His  answer  made,  the  Lords  committed  him  to  the 
Tower,  whither  he  was  brought  three  days  later,  on 
March  1,  1641.  As  he  passed  through  the  city  the 
prentices  raised  a  shout,  and  a  crowd  assembled.  "And 
so  they  followed  me  with  clamour  and  revilings,  even 
beyond  barbarity  itself;  not  giving  over  till  the  coach 
was  entered  in  at  the  Tower  gate.  Mr.  Maxwell,  out 
of  his  love  and  "care,  was  exceedingly  troubled  at  it ;  but 
I  bless  God  for  it,  my  patience  was  not  moved :  I 
looked  upon  a  higher  cause  than  the  tongues  of  Shimei 
and  his  children."  Safe  there,  it  might  seem  that  he 
was  forgotten,  for  while  the  tide  surged  outside,  while 
Strafford  was  beheaded,  and  the  war  began,  he  still 
remained  in  prison.  It  was  not  till  three  years  later 
that  he  was  actually  brought  to  trial. 

He  petitioned  for  a  copy  of  the  charge  against  him, 
and  that  he  might  have  counsel.  The  Lords  ordered 
that  he  should  have  such  counsel  as  were  not  of  counsel 
to  the  Earl  of  Strafford,  and  that  he  and  the  Earl  of 
Strafford  should  not  be  suffered  to  come  together  in 
the  Tower.  In  the  Tower  he  betook  himself  to  writing 
that  pathetic  memoir,  the  History  of  his  Troubles.  He 
noted  down  what  he  heard  of  the  proceedings  of 
Parliament,  where  day  by  day  his  cherished  reforms 
were  being  destroyed.    He  recorded  in  the  expressive 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


199 


brevity  of  a  severe  restraint  what  ho  knew  of  the  last 
hours  of  the  friend  who  had  been  as  his  other  self  in 
the  service  of  Church  and  Kiug.  The  pathos  of  the 
words  cannot  suffer  from  their  constant  repetition.  It 
is  a  classic  passage  in  the  literature  of  affliction. 

"His  lordship,  being  to  suffer  on  the  Wednesday 
morning,  did  upon  Tuesday  in  the  afternoon  desire  the 
Lord  Primate  of  Armagh,  then  with  him,  to  come  to 
me,  and  desire  me  that  I  would  not  fail  to  be  at  my 
chamber  window  at  the  open  casement  the  next  morn- 
ing, when  he  was  to  pass  by  it  as  he  went  to  execution ; 
that  though  he  might  not  speak  with  me,  yet  he  might 
see  me,  and  take  his  last  leave  of  me.  I  sent  him  word 
I  would,  and  did  so.  And  the  next  morning  as  he 
passed  by,  he  turned  towards  me,  and  took  the  solemnest 
leave  that  I  think  was  ever  by  any  at  distance  taken  one 
of  another ;  and  this  in  the  sight  of  the  Earl  of  New- 
port, then  Lord  Constable  of  the  Tower;  the  Lord 
Primate  of  Armagh,  the  Earl  of  Cleveland,  the  Lieu- 
tenant of  the  Tower,  and  divers  other  knights  and 
gentlemen  of  worth.  Besides,  during  the  time  of  our 
restraints,  and  the  nearness  of  our  lodgings,  we  held  no 
intercourse  each  with  other;  yet  Sir  W.  Balfore,  then 
Lieutenant  of  the  Tower,  told  me  often  what  frequent 
and  great  expressions  of  love  the  Earl  "made  to  me  .  .  . 
But  I  leave  that  honourable  person  in  his  grave,  and 
while  I  live  shall  honour  his  memory." 

The  old  man  fainted  as  he  gave  his  blessing  to  his 
staunch  friend.  When  he  came  to  himself  he  said  to 
those  around  him,  "  that  he  hoped  by  God's  assistance, 
and  his  own  innocency,  that  when  he  came  to  his  own 
execution  (which  he  daily  longed  for)  the  world  should 
perceive   he   had  been   more  sensible  of  the  Lord 


200 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Strafford's  loss  than  of  his  own :  and  good  reason  it 
should  he  so  (said  he),  for  the  gentleman  was  more 
serviceable  to  the  Church  (he  would  not  mention  the 
State)  than  either  himself  or  any  of  all  the  Churchmen 
had  ever  been."  It  was  indeed,  as  Heylin  adds,  "  a 
gallant  farewell  to  so  eminent  and  beloved  a  friend." 

From  the  day  of  Strafford's  execution  Laud,  it  is 
clear,  gave  up  hope  of  life;  but  he  preserved  his  courage 
unaltered,  and  thought  only  to  prove  his  innocence  to 
posterity  if  he  could  not  to  his  judges.  His  prayers  in 
prison  are  in  the  Psalmist's  words  of  confidence  and 
trust. 

News  reached  him  of  the  strange  chanQ.es  that  so 
rapidly  succeeded  each  other  outside.  The  King  in 
November  feasted  in  London,  in  January  was  scouted  on 
all  hands  for  his  attempt  to  arrest  the  five  members. 
Williams,  his  old  rival,  at  one  moment  the  idol  of  the 
Parliamentary  party,  and  the  base  adviser  of  the  King 
to  consent  to  Strafford's  death,  was  before  the  end  of 
the  year  committed,  with  eleven  other  bishops,  to  the 
Tower  for  their  protest  against  their  practical  exclu- 
sion from  Parliament.  The  Courts  of  Star  Chamber 
and  High  Commission  were  abolished,  and  the  whole 
machinery  of  personal  government  dislocated.  For  him- 
self, his  jurisdiction  in  certain  particulars  was  seques- 
tered, and  he  resigned  his  Chancellorship  of  Oxford 
in  a  dignified  and  pathetic  letter  of  farewell.  Ballads 
were  sung  up  and  down  the  streets  of  him.  He  could 
hear  them,  it  may  be,  in  prison.  "  The  new  year  of 
the  bishops'  fear,"  as  one  libel  called  it,1  found  the 
prentices  crying — 


1  The  Apprentices'  Advice  to  the  XII.  Bishops,  1642. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


201 


"  Go  twelve  Apostates,  not  Apostles,  view, 
Your  Arch  Guil.  Cant,  the  head  o'  th'  damned  crew, 
Who  hath  his  King,  country,  and  State  betray'd, 
And  to  be  hang'd  with  you  hath  so  long  stayd." 

When  he  could  get  to  service  he  was  preached  against 
"  with  vehemency  becoming  Bedlam,"  he  writes,  with 
something  of  his  old  spirit,  of  one  Joslin,  on  May  15, 
1642,  "  with  treason  sufficient  to  hang  him  in  any 
other  state,  and  with  such  particular  abuse  to  me,  that 
women  and  boys  stood  up  in  the  church  to  see  how 
I  could  bear  it."  There  was  still  no  stirring  for  his 
trial ;  but  from  time  to  time  orders  reached  him  from 
the  Lords  as  to  appointments  to  benefices.  Lambeth 
was  placed  in  charge  of  a  military  guard,  "  to  keep  it 
for  the  public  service,"  and  his  goods  were  sold.  For  a 
time  visitors  were  allowed  to  see  him,  and  among  them 
there  came  one  who  seemed  to  lure  him  to  incrimi- 
nate himself  by  speaking  against  Parliament.1  Usher 
was  often  allowed  to  be  with  him,  and  they  spoke  no 
doubt  of  the  last  hours  of  Strafford.  It  seemed  as  if 
at  one  time  the  Commons  would  not  have  been  sorry 
that  he  should  escape.  He  wrote  to  Pococke  of  the 
chance,  but  said  he  scorned  to  fly.2  Rumours  readied 
him  too  that  he  should  be  sent  to  New  England,3  and 
the  suggestion  indeed  was  actually  debated  in  the 
Commons,  but  was  rejected.  Since  his  imprisonment 
began  he  had  been  allowed  to  walk  for  a  short  space 
daily  alone.  But  at  length  an  order  came  against  this, 
that  he  might  not  go  out  without  his  keeper,4  "so  much 
as  to  take  the  air." 

Before  the  end  of  the  month  lie  suffered  a  more 


1  Diary,  Feb.  20,  1642.  2  T  wells,  Life  of  Pococke,  p.  84. 

3  Diary,  March  24,  1643.  4  Ibid.,  May  10,  1643. 


202 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


grievous  outrage.  An  order  was  issued  by  the  Com- 
mons that  all  the  prisoners  in  the  Tower  should  be 
searched  for  letters  and  other  papers.  Just  as  Leighton 
had  been  set  to  search  Lambeth,  Prynne  was  com- 
missioned to  deal  with  Laud  himself.  Early  in  the 
morning  of  May  31,  1643,  when  the  Archbishop  was 
still  in  bed,  and  his  servants  had,  not  risen,  his  "impla- 
cable enemy,"  having  left  sentries  without,  entered  his 
room  with  three  musketeers,  their  muskets  at  full  cock, 
and  began  to  rifle  his  pockets.  Laud  was  soon  up,  and, 
half-dressed,  stood  by  while  the  search  proceeded.  The 
papers  he  had  prepared  for  his  defence  were  taken 
from  him — the  King's  letters  about  a  vacant  benefice, 
the  Scots  service-book,  his  own  Diary,  and  even  his 
book  of  private  prayers.  "  Nor  could  I  get  him,"  he 
says,  "  to  leave  this  last ;  but  he  must  needs  see  what 
passed  between  God  and  me,  a  thing  I  think  scarce 
ever  offered  to  any  Christian."  Having  searched  up 
and  down,  in  cupboards  and  boxes,  the  eager  Prynne 
poeped  even  into  a  bundle  of  gloves,  of  which  Laud 
gave  him  a  pair,  and  at  last  went  his  way  with  the 
spoil.  "  I  was  somewhat  troubled  to  see  myself  used  in 
this  way,"  is  all  the  prisoner's  comment,  "  but  knew  no 
help  but  in  God  and  the  patience  which  He  had  given 
ine.  And  how  His  gracious  providence  over  me,  and 
His  goodness  to  me  wrought  upon  all  this  I  shall  in 
the  end  discover,  and  will  magnify,  however  it  succeed 
with  me." 

The  search  for  papers  was  for  the  object,  there  could 
be  no  doubt,  of  procuring  evidence  against  the  Arch- 
bishop. Already  committees  had  been  searching  for 
information.  They  had  taken  notes  of  all  the  com- 
plaints that  could  be  got  together  against  the  Star 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


203 


Chamber  or  High  Commission,  with  a  view  of  using 
them  iu  the  trial.  They  had  examined  Sir  Kenelm 
Digby  as  to  Laud's  relations  with  Rome,  from  whom 
they  gained  nothing  bat  an  assurance  that  the  Arch- 
bishop was  a  true  Anglican.  Parliament  a  few  days 
after  the  search  suspended  him  ah  officio  et  bencficio  et 
omni  et  omnimodo  jurisdiciionc  archiepiscopali. 

The  preparations  for  the  trial  now  began  to  proceed 
apace.  He  was  allowed  only  to  have  copies  of  the  papers 
that  had  been  taken  from  him  made  at  his  own  expense. 
The  documents  themselves  were  preserved  for  use 
against  him.  The  "  popish  plot  "  revealed  by  Habern- 
feld  was  served  up  by  Prynne  as  "  Rome's  Master- 
piece," an  ingenious  attempt  to  turn  a  supposed  scheme 
against  the  King's  and  the  Archbishop's  lives  into  a 
proof  of  the  latter's  collusion  with  Roman  agents.  The 
Diary  and  the  Prayer-Book  proved  a  mine  of  informa- 
tion ;  and  soon  rumour  reached  the  prisoner — and 
even  preachers  told  their  congregations  in  his  presence 
— that  great  things  had  been  discovered.  He  had  been 
promised  that  all  should  be  returned  within  three  or  four 
days,  but  the  bitter  lawyer  was  too  keen  to  use  every 
possible  evidence  to  think  fit  to  keep  his  word.1  After 
five  months  Prynne's  "  malice  had  hammered  out  some- 
thing," and  ten  additional  articles  were  brought  up  by 
the  Commons  against  Laud. 

The  next  month  was  spent  in  petitions  for  counsel, 
for  papers,  for  distinction  in  the  charges.  At  length 
the  trial  began.  From  this  period  we  are  overwhelmed 
with  evidence.    The  Record  Office  has  masses  of  papers 

1  I  think  there  can  he  little  douht  that  the  papers  taken  by 
Prynne  (twenty-one  bundles)  are  those  now  preserved  at  the 
Record  Oiftce. — State  Papers,  Domestic,  vol.  ccccxcix. 


204 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


relating  to  the  charges  and  the  trial.  The  journals  of 
the  House  of  Lords  record  all  formal  decisions.  Rush- 
worth  1  professes  to  give  a  detailed  account  of  each 
day's  business,  which  is  repeated  with  addition  from 
Laud's  own  MS.  in  the  State  Trials.  Prynne's  Gantcr- 
burie's  Doome  goes  over  the  same  ground  with  malicious 
comment.  William  Clarke,  then  a  young  man  begin- 
ning to  study  the  law,  attended  the  House  from  time 
to  time,  and  kept  a  more  or  less  detailed  account  of 
the  proceedings,  both  from  his  own  knowledge  and  from 
report.  The  Archbishop  himself,  with  painful  per- 
sistence, each  da}'  recorded,  after  all  the  strain  of  the 
examination  and  the  speaking,  the  pitiful  progress  of 
the  trial  which  would,  as  he  firmly  believed,  acquit  him 
with  honour  in  the  eyes  of  foreign  nations  and  of  pos- 
terity. The  materials  are  so  enormous  that  it  would 
be  impossible  to  give  any  complete  account  of  the  case 
in  any  form  but  a  separate  volume.  It  must  suffice  to 
sketch  the  course  of  the  proceedings,  laying  stress  only 
on  the  most  vital  points,  and  on  those  details  which 
the  MS.  of  William  Clarke,  now  used  for  the  first  time, 
adds  to  the  familiar  authorities. 

On  November  13,  1643,  Lautl,  after  his  long  and 
weary  imprisonment,  at  last  stood  at  the  bar.  He  was 
brought  by  Alderman  Pennington,  then  Lieutenant  of 
the  Tower,  by  water  to  Westminster.  As  he  looked 
across  at  Lambeth,  which  he  was  never  again  to  enter, 
he  may  well  have  thought  of  the  night  when  his  danger 
was  first  made  plain  to  him,  and  he  fled  over  the  river 
in  his  grey  cloak  to  take  refuge  where  he  was  now 

1  What  appear  to  be  Tl  a  si  iwor  Ill's  original  notes  are  among 
Lord  Braye's  MSS.  (see  Hist-.  MSS.  Comm.,  Report  X.,  part  6, 
p.  118  sqq.). 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


205 


to  be  tried  for  his  life.  "  Upon  the  Archbishop's  com- 
ing into  the  House  of  Peers,"  says  Clarke,  "the  articles 
and  charges  against  him  in  the  name  of  the  House  of 
Commons  and  of  the  Commons  of  England  were  read, 
unto  which  he  pleaded  'Not  Guilty'  in  that  manner  and 
form  as  it  was  there  laid  down;  and  then  making  a 
short  apology  for  himself,  gave  their  honours  thanks 
that  they  were  pleased  to  allow  him  counsel,  and  de- 
sired that  in  regard  he  was  unacquainted  with  matters 
of  law,  and  unfit  to  speak  for  himself  in  that  particular, 
their  lordships  would  be  pleased  to  accept  of  his  answer 
from  his  counsel,  which  their  lordships  assented  unto." 

The  proceedings  indeed  were  little  more  than  formal. 
Laud  made  a  pathetic  allusion  to  his  "great  years,  being 
threescore  and  ten  complete,  and  my  memory  and  other 
faculties  by  age  and  affliction  much  decayed."  He  saw 
that  some  of  the  Lords  watched  him  narrowly,  and  ho 
was  thankful  that  they  found  him  "  in  a  calm  "  where 
they  thought  he  "  would  have  been  stormy." 

He  was  not  brought  again  before  the  Lords  till 
January  16.  Meanwhile,  that  he  "  might  not  rust," 
as  he  quaintly  says,  he  was  called  on  to  answer  also 
in  the  Commons,  as  a  collateral  defendant  with  Cosin, 
to  the  charges  of  Peter  Smart  of  Durham.  Not  con- 
tent with  trying  him  for  his  life,  his  foes  must  needs 
take  each  trumpery  accusation  that  was  brought  for- 
ward, while  the  gravest  charges  were  still  pending. 
When  he  again  appeared  in  the  House  of  Lords  he 
was  to  give  an  answer  to  the  first  general  articles, 
and  this  was  deferred  till  the  22nd.  On  that  day 
he  drove  through  the  streets  amid  frost  and  snow, 
and  "a  most  bitter  day,"  while  the  people  railed  on 
him  as  he  passed.    He  put  in  his  answer,  a  plea  of 


20G 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


"  not  guilty "  on  all  counts,  with  a  special  claim  for 
exemption  from  all  charge  in  relation  to  the  Scots  dis- 
turbances by  the  Act  of  Indemnity,  passed  that  session, 
which  covered  all  acts,  howsoever  they  trenched  upon 
law  or  liberty,  committed  in  the  whole  business. 

So  he  departed,  and  was  put  off  from  day  to  day ; 
now  summoned  in  Smart's  case,  now  ordered  to  attend, 
now  deferred.  At  length  the  trial  began  in  earnest,  on 
Tuesday,  March  12,  1G43. 

In  the  House  of  Lords,  where  he  had  so  often  sat  as 
the  first  subject  in  the  realm,  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury stood  at  the  bar  for  long  hours,  often  from 
early  in  the  morning  till  two  o'clock,  and  then  again 
from  four  to  half-past  seven.  Only  a  strong  con- 
stitution— though  Laud  was  always  ailing  during  his 
long  life — could  have  borne  the  fatigue  and  anxiety. 
Yet  his  extraordinary  vivacity  and  acuteness,  his  won- 
derful memory,  the  readiness  of  his  replies  and  the 
absolutely  fearless  assertion  of  his  opinions,  won  the 
astonishment  of  his  enemies,  as  they  deserve  the  ad- 
miration of  posterity. 

The  trial  was  indeed  a  pitiable  performance.  Only 
the  bitterness  of  Prynne,  who  managed  the  case 
for  the  Commons,  supplied  the  counsel  with  notes, 
and  "  kept  a  kind  of  school  of  instruction  for "  the 
witnesses,  and  the  occasional  outbreak  of  savage  vin- 
dictiveness  in  the  evidence,  could  have  suggested  to 
an  ignorant  bystander  that  a  great  man  was  standing 
trial  for^  his  life.  The  peers  treated  the  affair  with 
scandalous  levity.  At  the  most,  on  any  day,  there 
were  but  thirteen  or  fourteen  present,  and  of  these 
not  two-thirds  sat  the  whole  day.  Never  was  the 
House  the  same  in  the  afternoon,  for  the  defence,  as 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


207 


it  was  in  the  morning,  for  the  accusation ;  and  not  a 
single  peer  save  the  Speaker,  Lord  Grey  of  Warke, 
whose  presence  was  necessary  to  make  a  house,  was 
present  at  the  whole  trial.  Never  in  English  history, 
it  may  be  truly  said,  was  a  more  monstrous  viola- 
tion of  justice  and  good  feeling  in  the  trial  of  a  capital 
charge. 

We  are  able,  from  Hollar's  print,1  and  some  con- 
temporary allusions,  to  picture  the  scene.  At  the 
end  of  the  House  stood  the  empty  throne,  raised 
on  three  steps;  behind  and  at  the  sides  were  such 
persons  as  were  privileged  to  stand  where  they  could 
best  see  the  prisoner.  Beneath  sat  Lord  Grey  on  the 
woolsack,  with  the  judges  and  lawyers  below.  At 
each  side  were  the  benches  of  the  peers.  Behind  the 
bar,  and  directly  facing  the  Speaker,  was  the  Arch- 
bishop, having  on  his  right  hand  the  Black  Rod,  and 
on  his  left  his  counsel,  while  behind  him  the  Lieu- 
tenant of  the  Tower  kept  guard  over  the  prisoner.  In 
front,  to  the  right  of  Laud,  and  between  him  and  the 
Speaker,  stood  the  clerk,  who  read  over  the  evidence ; 
and  on  the  same  side,  but  behind  the  bar,  was  the 
space  where  sat  such  of  the  Commons  as  came  to  the 
hearing — among  them  always  "  Mr.  Prynne  in  the 
midst."  Close  to  them  were  the  witnesses,  and  the  table 
where  lay  the  books  and  papers  that  were  to  be  given 
in  evidence.  The  people  stood  without  the  high  en- 
closure which  faced  the  throne  at  the  opposite  end  of 
the  hall,  gossiping  and  tattling  of  the  evidence  and  the 
prospects  of  the  trial. 

1  Prefixed  to  Hidden  Works  of  Darkness,  and  to  some  copies  of 
Canterburies  Doome. 


208 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


It  might  seem  to  one  who  wandered  in  by  chance, 
that,  with  all  the  bustle  of  the  accusers  and  the  listless- 
ness  of  the  judges,  the  suit  resolved  itself  into  a  combat 
for  life  between  the  little  old  man,  in  his  black  gown, 
with  a  large  tight  black  cap  covering  nearly  all  his 
head,  and  the  dark,  stern  lawyer,  with  the  long  black 
hair  that  concealed  his  cropped  ears.  And  so  it  was. 
Laud  kuew  who  was'  his  real  accuser,  and  learnt  soon 
how  little  he  regarded  the  rules  of  law  in  his  eagerness 
to  slay  the  man  he  hated ;  but  though  he  fought 
bravely  for  his  life,  he  forbore  to  resent  the  personal 
enmity  of  his  antagonist,  and  "left  him  to  the  bar  of 
Christ,  whose  mercy,"  he  prayed,  "would  give  him 
repentance  and  amend  him." 

The  first  day  began  with  an  order  that  each  day's 
evidence  should  each  day  be  answered  by  the  Arch- 
bishop— an  injustice  made  the  more  severe  since  he 
had  so  short  a  time  to  prepare  himself,  and  was  not 
allowed  any  help  from  his  counsel,  but  only  his  faith- 
ful secretary  Dell  to  hand  him  his  papers.  Serjeant 
Wilde  opened  the  case  in  a  florid  speech  which  seemed 
more  designed  to  catch  the  v  people  than  affect  the 
Lords.  Laud's  reply  was  in  the  highest  eloquence  he 
ever  attained.  It  was  a  masterly  summary  of  the 
difficulties  under  which  he  laboured,  coupled  with  a 
defence  of  his  own  religion  and  honour.  "  The  laws  of 
the  land  and  the  religion  of  those  laws  established" — 
against  both  these  he  was  said  to  have  offended.  To 
both  he  stoutly  asserted  his  entire  obedience :  and  his 
defence  of  his  faith,  as  we  read  it,  rings  true  with  the 
deep  note  of  the  full  loyalty  of  an  honest  man.  To 
the  charge  of  Popery  he  had  a  ready  answer.  What 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


209 


was  there  that  could  lure  him  to  it,  to  the  betrayal  of 
his  honour  and  the  breach  of  every  principle  of  his 
life  ?  And  what  was  there  to  keep  him  back  if  his 
conscience  led  him  to  Rome?  Not  wife,  or  children, 
or  worldly  comfort,  or  honour  :  "  for  whatsoever  the 
world  may  be  pleased  to  think  of  me,  I  have  led  a 
very  painful  life,  and  such  as  I  could  have  been  very 
well  content  to  change,  had  I  well  known  how.  And 
had  my  conscience  led  me  that  way,  I  am  sure  I  might 
have  lived  at  far  more  ease ;  and  either  have  avoided 
the  barbarous  libellings,  and  other  bitter  aud  grievous 
stories  which  I  have  here  endured,  or  at  the  least  been 
out  of  the  hearing.  Nay,  my  lords,  I  am  as  innocent 
in  this  business  of  religion,  as  free  from  all  practice,  or 
so  much  as  thought  of  practice,  for  any  alteration  to 
Popery,  or  any  way  blemishing  the  true  Protestant 
religion  established  in  the  Church  of  England,  as  I 
was  when  my  mother  first  bare  me  into  the  world. 
And  let  nothing  be  spoken  against  me  but  truth,"  he 
cried,  rising  to  the  note  of  passion  which  his  enemies 
looked  for  on  charges  less  vital  'to  his  honour,  "  and  I 
do  here  challenge  whatsoever  is  between  heaven  and 
hell  to  say  their  worst  against  me  in  point  of  my 
religion :  in  which,  by  God's  grace,  I  have  ever  hated 
dissimulation ;  and  had  I  not  hated  it,  perhaps  it 
might  have  been  better  with  me,  for  worldly  safety, 
than  now  it  is.  But  it  can  no  way  become  a  Christian 
bishop  to  halt  with  God." 

Clarke  summarizes  his  contention  briefly,  and  says 
that  he  declared,  "  that  if  he  had  desired  preferment 
for  compliance  with  the  Church  of  Rome,  he  might  have 
had  more  honour  in  foreign  parts  than  ever  he  was 
likely  to  obtain  here,  and  that  it  was  no  outward 

p 


210 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


honour  but  his  conscience  that  caused  him  to  refuse 
the  cardinal's  hat."  1 

But  the  strongest  argument  against  any  fondness 
fur  Rome  was  the  number  of  men  that  he  had  stayed, 
or  brought  back,  from  her  fold.  These  he  named  one 
by  one,  that  their  cases  might  be  patent  evidence  of  his 
faith,  and  this  touched  his  foes  most  nearly.  As  he 
went  out  Hugh  Peters  met  him  and  told  him,  "  that 
there  were  those  ministers  that  could  prove  not  only 
twenty-two,  but  two  hundred,  yea,  some  above  five 
hundred  that  were  converted  by  their  diligent  and 
faithful  labours  in  the  work  of  the  ministry,  and  might 
have  recalled  more,  had  they  not  been  silenced  by 
him."2 

The  next  day  he  was  ordered  to  attend  at  nine  in  the 
morning,  though  the  trial  rarely  began  till  two  hours 
later.  This  day  the  political  charges  were  taken — the 
endeavour  to  subvert  the  fundamental  laws  of  the 
kingdom  and  the  disparagement  of  Parliament.  The 
counsel  who  introduced  the  charge  was  Maynard,  and 
among  the  chief  witnesses  was  Sir  Henry  Vane,  who 
swore  that  after  the  ending  of  the  Short  Parliament, 
Laud  had  told  the  King  that  "  now  he  might  use  his 
own  power."  3 

Laud's  summary  of  his  answer  gives  the  points  clearly 
— "  The  subversion  of  the  fundamental  laws}     1.  I 

1  Clarke  MS.  The  other  authorities  do  not  mention  the  refer- 
ence to  the  cardinalate  ;  but  Laud  may  not  have  remembered 
everything  he  had  said,  and  Clarke  was  probably  present.  But 
see  Wharton's  note,  Works,  iv.  66. 

2  Clarke  MS.  The  last  clause  is  omitted  by  Laud,  who  adds, 
however,  that  Peters  "  came  as  if  he  would  have  struck  "  him. 

3  The  evidence  was  taken  on  commission,  Vane  being  ill.  Laud 
had  of  course  no  opportunity  to  cross-examine. 

4  State  Papers,  Domestic,  vol.  ccccxcix.,  no.  54.     These  are 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


211 


humbly  conceive  this  cannot  be  meant  of  the  breach  of 
any  one  or  two  laws,  but  of  the  whole  frame  of  the  law. 
For  else  every  breach  upon  one  or  few  laws  were  treason, 
which  no  man  can  say.  2.  I  never  did  or  intended  any 
thing  (against)  any  main  law  of  the  kingdom,  which 
may  in  any  construction  be  capital,  much  less  against 
the  frame  and  body  of  the  law.  3.  I  humbly  conceive 
there  can  be  no  rational  attempt  against  the  body  of  the 
law  but  by  force  :  I  never  had  either  power  or  inten- 
tion for  the  use  of  any  force.  4.  For  the  Irish  army  1 — 
it  is  to  me  as  non  ens.  I  never  so  much  as  heard  it 
spoken  of  for  England,  but  for  Scotland  only.  5.  For 
the  words  in  Sir  Henry  Vane's  paper,  I  am  sure  I  spake 
them  not  as  he  hath  set  them  down.  But  if  such  words 
were  spoken,  they  cannot  be  forced  to  make  the  speaker 
guilty  of  any  intended  subversion  of  the  law.  For 
'  some  course  must  be  taken '  cannot  imply  that  that 
course  must  needs  be  illegal.  G.  And  this  I  am  sure  of, 
that  at  the  Council  tabic,  where  I,  had  the  honour  to 
sit,  I  did  to  the  uttermost  of  my  understanding  keep 
myself  as  much  to  legal  ways  as  any  man.  And  this  I 
know  the  Lord-Keeper  Coventry  would  witness  were 
he  living;  and  I  hope  the  honourable  great  men  which 
yet  sit  there  will  testify  as  much  for  me." 

Evidence  of  particular  sharp  sayings  was  brought 
against  him — in  most  cases  by  only  one  witness — and 
stoutly  denied  by  him.  Much  that  was  childish  and 
incredible  was  alleged  ;  some  things  that  might  be  but 
slight  perversions  of  the  obiter  dicta  of  an  impetuous 
man.    His  promotion  of  Manwaring  and  Heylin  were 

probably  the  notes  from  which  Laud  spuke.  He  wrote  his  answer 
more  fully  in  his  history. 

As  in  the  charge  against  Strafford. 


212 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


charged  against  bim,  and  the  grant  of  subsidies  in 
Convocation, — neither,  surely,  on  the  worst  construction, 
evidence  of  high  treason.  So  "  this  tedious  day " 
ended. 

The  third  day  was  but  a  brief  session.  In  the 
interval  he  had  been  deprived  even  of  the  faithful  Dell, 
and  he  made  a  vigorous  protest  to  which  the  Lords 
were  compelled  to  listen.  The  trial  was  resumed  on 
Monday  the  18th  of  March.  He  was  then  charged  in 
relation  to  the  restoration  of  S.  Paul's,  "a  strange 
piece  of  treason,  the  repair  of  S.  Paul's,"  said  he :  "  the 
manner  of  doing  it,  by  demolishing  of  men's  houses," 
they  retorted,  was  the  charge.  The  day  was  spent  in 
petty  accusations,  which  Laud  met  with  indomitable 
spirit  and  some  sly  touches  of  humour.  He  was 
charged  from  his  Diary  with  projecting  to  give  the 
London  tithes  to  the  clergy.  He  commented  upon  their 
condition  under  the  new  vdgimc.  "  They  are  now  under 
the  taskmaster  of  Egypt;  the  tale  of  brick  must  be 
made,  they  must  preach  twice  a  Sunday,  get  straw 
where  they  can."  He  had  already  had  experience,  from 
the  sermons  he  had  heard  since  he  was  imprisoned,  of 
the  shifts  the  ministers  were  set  to  to  "  get  straw  "  for 
their  discourses. 

Then  came  the  cases  of  Prynne,  Burton,  and  Bast- 
wick.  It  was  easy  for  him  to  show  how  little  Prynne 
limited  himself  to  the  truth.  After  more  petty  baiting 
about  S.  Paul's,  the  day  ended  with  Laud's  terse 
observations — 

"  First,  that  here  have  been  thirteen  witnesses  at 
least  produced  in  their  own  cause.  Secondly,  that 
•whereas  here  have  been  so  many  things  urged  this  day 
about  the  Star  Chamber  and  the  Council  table,  the 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


213 


Act  made  this  Parliament  for  the  regulating  of  the  one 
and  the  taking  away  of  the  other  takes  no  notice  of 
anything  past ;  and  yet  acts  past  (and  those  joint  acts 
of  the  Council  and  not  mine)  are  urged  as  treasonable, 
of  conducing  to  treason,  against  me.  Nay,  the  Act  is 
so  far  from  looking  back,  or  making  such  offences 
treason,  as  that  if  any  offend  in  future,  and  that  several 
times,  yet  the  Act  makes  it  but  misdemeanour,  and 
prescribes  punishments  accordingly." 

So  the  trial  went  on  from  day  to  day,  March  22, 
April  16,  May  4,  16,  20,  27,  June  6,  11,  17,  20,  27, 
July  5,  17,  24,  29,  September  2,  11,  14,  October  11, 
and  November  16.  Laud's  trouble  was  greatly  increased 
— and  the  expense  alone  was  six  or  seven  pounds  a  day 
to  him — by  his  being  frequently  summoned,  and  then 
obliged,  after  waiting  some  hours,  to  return  to  the 
Tower  unheard.  This  happened  on  April  4,  8,  22,  28, 
30,  May  13,  22,  25,  June  6,  July  15.  The  accounts  of 
the  trial  are  full  to  tediousness  :  Laud  noted  the  evidence 
and  the  replies  with  indomitable  patience,  and  the  young 
law  student  Clarke  grew  more  eager  each  day  to  put 
down  the  particulars.  There  is  little  to  relieve  the 
bitterness  and  malice  that  disfigure  the  dreary  record, 
save  the  quaint  flashes  of  humour  that  break  out  now 
and  again  in  the  old  man's  history.  The  terse  shrewd- 
ness with  which  from  time  to  time  he  summed  up  in  a 
word  his  reply  to  long  charges  shows  the  vigour  and 
concentration  of  mind  which  never  deserted  him. 

"  I  did  in  general  put  the  Lords  in  mind  that  nothing 
of  late  times  was  done  either  in  Star  Chamber  or  at 
Council  table  which  was  not  done  in  King  James's 
or  Queen  Elizabeth's  times,  before  I  was  born," — an 
unanswerable  argument  if  they  stood  by  precedents. 


214 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


"  I  had  liturgies,  all  I  could  get,  both  ancient  and 
modern.  I  had  also  the  Alcoran  in  divers  copies.  If 
this  be  an  argument,  why  do  they  not  accuse  me  to  be 
a  Turk  ?  " 

"  Shall  I  bow  to  man  in  each  House  of  Parliament, 
and  shall  I  not  bow  to  God  in  His  House  ? " 

When  one  said  there  were  copes  used  in  the  Oxford 
colleges,  and  that  a  traveller  would  say  "that  he  saw 
just  such  a  thing  on  the  Pope's  back," — "  This  wise  man 
might  have  said  as  much  of  a  gown.  He  saw  a  gown 
on  the  Pope's  back,  therefore  a  Protestant  may  not  wear 
one ;  or,  entering  into  S.  Paul's,  he  may  cry,  '  Down 
with  it,  for  I  saw  the  Pope  in  just  such  another  church 
in  Koine.' " 

They  made  a  great  matter  of  his  denying  the  Pope 
to  be  Antichrist.  He  had  said  nothing  about  it,  he 
declared,  but  "  'Tis  true  I  did  not,  I  cannot,  approve  foul 
language  in  controversies.  Nor  do  I  think  the  calling 
of  the  Pope  Antichrist  did  ever  yet  convert  an  under- 
standing Papist." 

The  patience  and  self-control  of  the  man  were 
indeed  marvellous.  Day  after  day  he  had  to  stand 
and  hear  himself  railed  upon  in  the  coarsest  language  ; 
day  after  day  to  see  his  trial  conducted  with  a  dis- 
regard of  the  rules  of  ordinary  procedure  of  which  even 
a  country  justice  might  have  been  ashamed.  As  he  went 
to  and  fro  in  the  streets,  and  at  the  landing-stage  at 
Westminster,  his  enemies  reviled  him.  One  day  a 
coarse  fellow  came  up  and  asked  aloud  "  What  the  Lords 
meant  to  be  troubled  so  long  and  so  often  with  such  a 
base  fellow — they  should  do  well  to  hang  him  out  of 
the  way."  The  last  and  bitterest  blow  was  the  publica- 
tion of  his  Diary,  the  record  of  his  most  private  thoughts 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


215 


garbled  and  distorted  by  the  annotations  of  Prynnc. 
On  September  2  he  was  to  make  the  recapitulation 
of  his  whole  cause.  "  But  as  soon  as  I  came  to  the  bar 
I  saw  every  lord  present  with  a  thin  new  book  in  folio, 
in  a  blue  coat.  I  heard  that  morning  that  Mr.  Prynnc 
had  printed  my  Diary,  and  printed  it  to  the  world  to 
disgrace  me.1  Some  notes  of  his  own  are  made  upon 
it.  The  first  and  the  last  are  two  desperate  untruths, 
besides  some  others.  This  was  the  book  then  in  the 
Lords'  hands,  and,  I  assure  myself,  that  time  picked 
for  it  that  the  sight  of  it  might  damp  me  and  disenable 
me  to  speak.  I  confess  I  was  a  little  troubled  at  it. 
But  after  I  had  gathered  up  myself,  and  looked  up  to 
God,  I  went  on  the  business  of  the  day." 

It  was  indeed  the  extremity  of  cruelty ;  but  it  might 
speak  to  the  mind  of  honest  men  all  the  more  loudly 
in  favour  of  his  innocence. 

"  My  very  pockets  searched ;  my  Diary,  my  very 
Prayer-book  taken  from  me,  and  after  used  against 
me ;  and  that  in  some  cases  not  to  prove  but  to  make  a 
charge.  Yet  I  am  thus  far  glad,  even  for  this  sad 
accident.  For  by  my  Diary  your  Lordships  have  seen 
the  passages  of  my  life ;  and  by  my  Prayer-book  the 
greatest  secrets  between  God  and  my  soul;  so  that  you 
may]  be  sure  you  have  me  at  the  very  bottom :  yet, 
blessed  be  God,  no  disloyalty  is  found  in  the  one,  no 
Popery  in  the  other." 

His  speech  was  brief  and  pointed.    With  a  dignified 

1  "  A  Breviate  of  the  Life  of  William  Laud,  extracted  (for  the 
most  part)  verbatim  out  of  his  own  Diary,  and  other  writings 
under  his  own  hand,"  1644.  The  first  scandal  is  that  he  caused 
the  "cage"  at  Reading  to  he  pulled  down  because  it  was  opposite 
to  the  house  he  was  born  in  ;  the  second,  that  he  dreamed  at 
Oxford  he  should  rise  to  great  power,  but  in  the  end  be  hanged. 


21G 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


answer  to  the  unworthy  charges  that  had  been  made, 
he  appealed  to  the  statute  of  Edward  III.  which 
defined  and  limited  the  offence  of  high  treason. 
Having  so  done  he  commended  himself  to  the  Pro- 
vidence of  God.  "And  under  that  Providence,  which 
will  I  doubt  not  work  to  the  best  to  my  soul  that  loves 
God,  I  repose  myself." 

At  the  next  sitting  his  counsel,  Hearn,  addressed 
himself  to  the  question  of  treason — a  clear,  conclusive 
argument.  In  none  of  the  acts  alleged,  however 
grievous,  was  there  "  any  treason  by  any  established 
law  of  this  kingdom."  When  the  strange  argument  of 
"cumulative  treason"  had  been  used  he  had  replied 
already,  "  I  cry  you  mercy.  This  is  the  first  time  that 
e'er  I  heard  that  a  thousand  black  rabbits  did  make 
one  black  horse." 

The  tedious  trial  had  so  far  brought  at  least  one 
result.  It  was  clear  even  to  the  managers  of  the 
impeachment  that  not  even  the  small  bod}'  of  terrorized 
peers  could  find  the  prisoner  guilty  on  the  counts  with 
which  he  was  charged.  As  in  Strafford's  case,  it  was 
plain  that  the  formal  process  of  law  must  be  abandoned, 
and  a  bill  of  attainder  must  be  brought  in.  Since 
Laud  could  not  be  proved  to  be  a  traitor,  Parliament 
must  declare  that  he  was  one,  and  condemn  him  as  such. 

On  October  28,  a  petition  of  Londoners  demanded 
that  he  should  be  executed  as  a  traitor.  On  Novem- 
ber 1  he  was  suddenly  summoned  to  the  House  of 
Commons.  Speaker  Lenthall  told  him  as  he  stood  at 
the  bar  that  a  bill  of  attainder  was  brought  in,  and  he 
was  desired  to  hear  the  summary  of  evidence.  He  was 
refused  the  aid  of  counsel,  and  required  to  answer 
on  the  11th. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


217 


The  long  trial  and  the  scattered  evidence  had  now 
been  compressed.  The  Commons  charged  him  with  an 
endeavour  to  "alter  the  true  Protestant  religion  into 
Popery,"  and  "  an  endeavour  to  subvert  the  laws  of  the 
kingdom."  To  the  former  charge  there  were  the  petty 
proofs  of  ceremonies,  of  the  statue  over  S.  Mary's 
porch  at  Oxford,  of  pictures  in  Bibles,  and  such  like  > 
to  the  latter  the  old  charge  of  Sir  Harry  Vane,  the 
Canons,  and  so  forth.  His  answer  was  to  the  same 
effect  as  in  the  Lords — a  denial  of  particulars,  and  an 
appeal  to  statute  law. 

"  Mr.  Speaker,"  he  said,  with  the  simple  pathos  of 
unvarnished  truth,  "  I  am  very  aged,  considering  the 
turmoils  of  my  life,  and  I  daily  find  in  myself  more 
decays  than  I  make  show  of;  and  the  period  of  my 
life,  in  the  course  of  nature,  cannot  be  far  off.  It 
cannot  but  be  a  great  grief  unto  me,  to  stand  at  these 
years  thus  charged  before  ye.  Yet  give  me  leave  to  say 
thus  much  without  offence  :  whatsoever  errors  or  faults 
I  may  have  committed  by  the  way,  in  any  my  pro- 
ceedings, through  human  infirmity — as  who  is  he  that 
hath  not  offended,  and  broken  some  statute  laws  too, 
by  ignorance,  or  misapprehension,  or  forgetfulness,  at 
some  sudden  time  of  action  ? — yet  if  God  bless  me 
with  so  much  memory,  I  will  die  with  these  words  in 
my  mouth,  '  That  I  never  intended,  much  less  en- 
deavoured, the  subversion  of  the  laws  of  the  kingdom  ; 
nor  the  bringing  in  of  Popish  superstition  upon  the 
true  Protestant  religion  established  by  law  in  this 
kingdom.'  " 

So  ended  the  day, — a  "heavy  business," — and  physical 
weakness  at  length  broke  down  the  stout  old  man  for  a 
while.    Two  days  later  he  was  called  again  to  hear  the 


218 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


counsel  reiterate  the  charge  :  lie  might  not  reply ;  and 
when  he  left  the  House  the  Bill  was  passed  without 
more  ado.  William  Laud,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
was  attainted  of  High  Treason,  and  to  suffer  the  pains 
of  death.  The  Bill  was  taken  up  to  the  Lords  on 
November  16.1 

It  was  urged  with  every  argument  of  passion.  The 
people,  it  was  said,  stood  at  the  gates  of  the  House 
clamouring  to  see  justice  done.  "They  should  do  well 
to  agree  to  the  ordinance,"  said  Strode,  "  or  else  the 
multitude  would  force  them  to  it."  Essex  returned  a 
bold  answer  on  behalf  of  the  Lords'  independence  :  but 
it  was  an  independence  which  had  long  passed  away. 

It  was  little  more  than  a  form  that  the  ordinance 
was  debated  by  the  Lords  on  four  occasions,  or  that  they 
desired  a  conference  with  the  Commons  as  to  the  law 
of  treason.  The  judges  unanimously  declined  to  give 
opiuion  as  to  the  treason,  "  because  they  could  not 
deliver  any  opinion  in  point  of  treason  but  what  was 
particularly  expressed  to  be  treason  in  the  statute  of 
25  Edward  III." 2 

Thus  the  shadow  of  death  hung  over  Laud  through 
Christmas  and  the  New  Year.  Christmas  Day  was 
kept  by  the  Houses'  order  as  a  strict  fast — "  a  fast  never 
before  heard  of  in  Christendom."  It  was  a  sign  that 
the  historic  Church  which  Laud  had  so  faithfully  served 
was  powerless  to  save  him. 

On  January  4  the  Lords  passed  the  Attainder,3  and 

1  Lords' Journals :  Clarke  MS. 

2  Lords'  Journals.  There  is  doubt  as  to  the  number  of  peers 
present.  Clarendon  says  not  above  twelve.  The  highest  number 
asserted  is  fourteen. 

3  Lords'  Journals:  Cal  State  Papers,  Bom.,  1G44-5,  pp.  228, 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


219 


two  days  later  it  was  ordered  "  that  on  Friday  next  the 
Lieutenant  of  the  Tower  of  London  do  deliver  the 
said  Archbishop  into  the  custody  of  the  Sheriffs  of 
London,  who  are  to  see  the  execution  of  justice  upon 
him  performed  according  to  the  sentence  of  Parliament." 1 

The  next  day  Laud  sent  in  a  pardon  of  the  King 
dated  April  12, 1643,  but  it  was  not  allowed.  The  House 
even  refused  to  abate  any  of  the  cruel  rigours  of  the 
execution;  but  on  the  following  morning  they,  "  upon  a 
most  humble  petition  of  the  Archbishop,  wherein  he  did 
not  desire  the  Parliament  for  his  life,  but  only  that  he 
might  not  die  that  of  hanging  by  the  neck,  in  that  he 
was  once  a  member  of  the  Parliament,  and  some  other 
reasons,  the  House  of  Commons  concurred  with  the 
Lords  that  he]  should  be  beheaded  on  Friday  next,  and 
then  the  Sheriffs  of  London  should  see  him  executed  in 
that  manner  accordingly."  2 

The  same  day  that  the  Attainder  was  passed,  the 
Lords  agreed  to  the  substitution  of  the  "  Directory  "  for 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  so  that,  as  a  member  of 
the  Commons  wrote  to  his  friend,  "  the  Archbishop 
and  the  service-book  died  together."  3 

The  last  page  of  the  History  was  written  in  a  clear, 
bold  hand,  very  unlike  that  of  an  old  man  on  the  verge 
of  death,  on  January  3.  "  The  rest  shall  follow  as  it 
comes  to  my  knowledge,"  are  the  last  words.  Next  day 
the  Lieutenant  of  the  Tower  came  to  tell  him  that  the 
ordinance  was  passed.   He  heard  it  calmly,  and  prepared 


229.  It  was  to  be  made  no  precedent  of  treason  for  the  judges — 
a  curious  commentary  on  the  justice  of  the  Act. 

1  Clarke  MS.  2  Ibid. 

3  W.  Ashurst  to  Col.  Moore,  Hist.  M8S.  Comm.,  Report  X., 
Appendix,  pt.  4. 


220 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


for  death.  He  pleaded  that  he  might  have  three  of  his 
friends  to  minister  to  him,  Dr.  Stern,  Dr.  Heywood,  and 
Dr.  Martin.  The  Lords  agreed,  but  the  Commons 
refused  even  this  last  request.  They  would  allow  only 
Dr.  Stern,  with  two  Puritan  ministers — one  or  both  to 
be  present  whenever  Stern  was  with  him.  To  one 
whose  opinions  on  sacramental  confession  were  well 
known,  the  Commons  sank  so  low  as  thus  to  deny  the 
possibility  of  its  private  use  at  the  hour  of  death. 

Burton  in  those  last  days  "with  two  other  godly 
reverend  brethren  "  went  to  give  him  counsel ;  but  he 
returned  him  thanks  and  would  not  see  him.1 

The  calmness  which  his  enemies  had  often  declared 
that  he  lacked  in  life  did  not  desert  him  at  last. 
Prayer  and  fasting,  the  touching  outpourings  of  humili- 
ation and  faith  which  his  Devotions  have  made  familiar, 
prepared  his  soul  for  the  last  agony.  "  He  that  had  so 
long  been  a  confessor  could  not  but  think  it  a  release 
of  miseries  to  be  made  a  martyr."  2 

His  last  night  was  spent  in  peaceful  slumber.  He 
had  prepared  himself  for  the  morrow,  and  to  avoid  any 
chance  of  ill-considered  or  distracted  language  in  his 
last  speech,  he  wrote  out  carefully  all  that  he  intended 
to  say.  Heylin,  who  almost  worshipped  him,  and  who 
has  made  the  record  of  these  last  days  read  like  the 
triumphant  march  of  a  victorious  general,  says  quaintly 
— "As  he  did  not  fear  the  frowns,  so  neither  did  he 
covet  the  applause  of  the  vulgar  herd,  and  therefore 
rather  chose  to  read  what  he  had  to  speak  unto  the 
people  than  to  affect  the  ostentation  either  of  memory 

1  The  Orcmdlmposter  Unmasked,  by  Henry  Burton. 

2  A  Briefe  Relation  of  the  Death  and  Sufferings,  &c.  Oxford, 
1644,  p.  14. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


221 


or  wit  in  that  dreadful  agony.  As  for  the  matter  of  his 
speech,  besides  what  did  concern  himself  and  his  own 
purgation,  his  great  care  was  to  clear  his  Majesty  and 
the  Church  of  England  from  any  inclination  to 
Popery." 

When  the  morning  came  he  continued  in  prayer  till 
the  officers  arrived,  when  he  went  forth  with  them, 
having  so  cheerful  and  ruddy  a  countenance  that  men 
thought  he  had  painted  it  till  they  saw  it  turn  pale  as 
ashes  after  the  fatal  blow.  As  he  mounted  the  steps 
some  still  questioned  and  taunted  him,  but  all  was 
hushed  when  he  stood  forth  on  the  scaffold  to  speak  to 
the  dense  crowd  that  covered  Tower  Hill.  It  was  a 
last  sermon  that  he  delivered,  for  in  it  he  thought  more 
of  others  than  himself,  and  the  pathos  of  it  turned  many 
who  had  reviled  him  to  grieve  at  his  murder. 

"  Good  people,"  he  began,  "  this  is  an  uncomfortable 
time  to  preach ;  yet  I  shall  begin  with  a  text  of  Scrip- 
ture, Hebrews  xii.  2 — '  Let  us  run  with  patience  the 
race  that  is  set  before  us,  looking  unto  Jesus,  the  Author 
and  Finisher  of  our  faith  ;  who  for  the  joy  that  was  set 
before  Him,  endured  the  Cross,  despising  the  shame, 
and  is  set  down  at  the  right  hand  of  the  throne  of 
God.' 

"I  have  been  long  in  my  race,"  he  said,  "and  how 
I  have  looked  to  Jesus,  the  Author  and  Finisher  of  my 
faith,  He  best  knows.  I  am  now  come  to  the  end  of 
my  race,  and  here  I  find  the  '  Cross ' — a  death  of 
shame."  Then  he  spoke  of  the  affliction  and  its  end, 
and  still  stoutly  declared  that  he  would  not  follow  the 
imaginations  that  the  people  were  setting  up,  as  the 
three  children  would  not  worship  the  king's  image. 
"  Nor  will  I  forsake  the  temple  and  the  truth  of  God" 


222 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


—it  was  his  last  word  on  Puritanism — "  to  follow  the 
bleating  of  Jeroboam's  calves  in  Dan  and  Bethel."  He 
spoke  of  the  people,  "  miserably  misled  " ;  of  the  King, 
"as  sound  a  Protestant  (according  to  the  religion  by 
law  established)  as  any  man  in  this  kingdom  "  ;  of  the 
Londoners,  who  cried  round  the  Parliament  House  for 
blood ;  of  his  predecessors  who  had  suffered  before 
him,  S.  Alphege  and  Simon  Sudbury — "  though  I  am 
not  only  the  first  Archbishop,  but  the  first  man,  that 
hath  ever  died  by  an  ordinance  in  Parliament;"  and 
lastly,  of  his  religion  and  faithfulness  to  the  laws. 
"  What  clamours  and  slanders  I  have  endured  for 
labouring  to  keep  a  uniformity  in  the  external  service 
of  God,  according  to  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of  this 
Church,  all  men  know  and  I  have  abundantly  felt." 

And  so  at  last,  "  I  have  done.  I  forgive  all  the 
world,  all  and  every  of  those  bitter  enemies  which  have 
persecuted  me :  and  humbly  desire  to  be  forgiven  of 
God  first,  and  then  of  every  man,  whether  I  have 
offended  him  or  not,  if  he  do  but  conceive  that  I  have. 
Lord,  do  Thou  forgive  me,  and  I  beg  forgiveness  of 
him.    And  so  I  heartily  desire  you  to  join  with  me." 

Then  he  prayed  aloud,  for  pardon  for  the  people  and 
himself.  When  the  Lord's  Prayer  had  been  said  for 
the  last  time,  he  gave  his  manuscript  to  Stern,  spoke  to 
one  whom  he  saw  noting  his  speech  and  begged  him  not 
to  publish  a  false  or  imperfect  copy,  and  then  prepared 
to  die. 

At  the  last  moment,  he  saw  through  the  boards  of 
the  scaffold  the  heads  of  the  people  below,  and  begged 
that  they  might  be  moved,  lest  his  blood  should  fall 
upon  them.  Even  then  he  was  not  to  have  peace,  for 
Sir  John  Clotworthy,  a  rough  Irishman,  asked  him, 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


223 


"  What  was  the  comfortablcst  saying  which  a  dying 
man  would  have  in  his  mouth  ?  "  He  answered  meekly, 
"  Cupio  dissolvi  et  esse  cum  Christo."  Still  pressed,  he 
said  that  the  assurance  was,  "  The  Word  of  God  con- 
cerning Christ  and  His  dying  for  us."  And  then  he 
turned  away,  to  the  executioner,  "as  the  gentler  and 
discreeter  person."  To  him  he  said,  giving  him  money, 
"Honest  friend,  God  forgive  thee,  and  I  do:  and  do 
thy  office  upon  me  without  mercy."  Then  he  knelt 
down  and  prayed — 

"  Lord,  I  am  coming  as  fast  as  I  can  :  I  know  I  must 
pass  through  the  shadow  of  death  before  I  can  come 
to  Thee ;  but  it  is  but  umbra  mortis,  a  mere  shadow  of 
death,  a  little  darkness  upon  nature  :  but  Thou,  by 
Thy  merits  and  passion,  hast  broken  through  the  jaws 
of  death.  The  Lord  receive  my  soul,  and  have  mercy 
upon  me,  and  bless  this  kingdom  Avith  peace  and  plenty, 
and  with  brotherly  love  and  charity,  that  there  may 
not  be  this  effusion  of  Christian  blood  amongst  them, 
for  Jesus  Christ  His  sake,  if  it  be  Thy  will."  A  moment 
more  in  silent  prayer,  and  then  he  said,  "Lord,  receive 
my  soul,"  and  all  was  over. 

Beautiful  and  courageous  the  death  seemed  even  to 
his  enemies,  and  the  prayer  breathed  the  confidence  of 
one  who  had  learned  to  know  God  as  his  Redeemer 
and  Friend.  "  Never  did  man,"  as  Heylin  truly  says, 
"  put  off  mortality  with  a  better  courage,  nor  look  upon 
his  enemies  with  more  Christian  charity."  His  worst 
foes  would  say  that  nothing  in  his  life  became  him  like 
his  leaving  it.  The  boldest  heart  might  rejoice  to 
meet  death  so  nobly. 

From  the  hour  of  his  death  the  reaction  set  in.  The 
tide  of  war  surged  far  away  from  where  his  body  was 


221 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


laid  to  rest ;  but  in  his  grave  the  first  strength  of 
the  new  Restoration  movement  was  sown.  The  King- 
might  fight  and  fall,  but  the  permanence  of  the  English 
Church  was  assured  by  the  martyrdom,  as  it  was  soon 
felt  to  be,  of  her  greatest  son. 

Within  a  few  days  came  out  the  copy  of  his  last 
speech,  which  Hinde  the  printer  had  taken  down  as  it 
was  spoken.1  A  little  later  Heylin  published  at  Oxford 
"A  briefe  relation  of  the  death  and  sufferings  .  .  .  . 
with  a  more  perfect  copy  of  his  speech  and  other 
passages  on  the  scaffold  than  hath  been  hitherto  im- 
printed." 2  Dering,  who  had  so  bitterly  attacked  him, 
and  whose  shallow  mind  so  faithfully  reflected  the 
currents  of  popular  feeling,  soon  came  to  say  that 
S.  Paul's  would  be  his  perpetual  monument,  and  his 
book  against  the  Jesuit  his  lasting  epitaph. 

The  enemies  of  the  Church  soon  saw  the  effects  of 

1  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury's  Speech,  or  His  Funerall 

Sermon, 

Preacht  by  himself  on  the  Scaffold  on  Tower  Hill,  on  Friday 

the  10th  January,  1644,  Upon  Hebrews  12,  1,  2. 
Also,  the  Prayers  which  he  used  at  the  same  time  and  place 

before  his  Execution. 
All  faithfully  Written  by  John  Hinde,  whom  the  Archbishop 
beseeched  that  he  would  not  let  any  wrong  be  done  him 
by  any  phrase  in  false  Copies. 

Licensed  &  Entered  according  to  Order. 
London,  granted  by  Peter  Cole,  at  the  signe  of  the  Printing- 
Presse  in  Cornhill,  neer  the  Royall  Exchange,  over  against 
Pope's-head-alley,  1644. 

The  copy  lent  me  by  my  friend  Mr.  Firth  has  corrections, 
"  where  the  dashes  or  lines  are  drawn  is  more  than  was  in  the 
perfeckt  copy  of  my  Lord's  own  writing  and  what  is  written  in 
the  margent  or  interlined  is  left  out  and  it  hath  been  carefully 
perused." 

2  Oxford,  1644  (1645).  It  is  not  stated  to  be  by  Heylin,  but 
its  practical  identity  with  the  last  pages  of  his  Cyprianus  Amjlicus 
leaves  little  doubt  of  the  authorship. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


225 


their  act,  and  endeavoured  too  late  to  prevent  them. 
The  Mercurius  Britannious,  before  the  month  was  out, 
declared  that  the  last  speech  ought  never  to  have  been 
printed  "  by  a  penman  and  printer  of  our  own " ;  and 
thought  it  worth  while  to  contradict  its  statements 
seriatim,  as  a  "  piece  of  cunning  close-couched  scandal 
against  religion,  reformation,  and  the  Parliament." 

Burton  burst  out  into  a  frenzied  denunciation, 
accusing  the  murdered  man  of  hypocrisy,  blasphemy, 
and  many  crimes,  and  calling  him  "  Satan's  second 
child,"  and  an  "inveterate  adversary  of  Christ"  "wil- 
fully damning  his  own  soul."  Other  libels  as  bitter 
were  published.1  They  were  signs  that  all  right- 
thinking  men  regretted  the  act  when  it  could  not 
be  recalled.  The  ballad-mongers  who  had  sung  his 
crimes  and  his  disgrace  now  sang  his  merits  and  his 
martyrdom. 2 

His  body  lay  for  some  hours  in  the  Tower,  and  was 
buried  next  day  in  a  vault  in  the  church  of  All  Hallows, 
Barking,  followed  to  the  grave  by  "  great  multitudes  of 
people  whom  love,  or  curiosity,  or  remorse  of  conscience 
had  drawn  together  purposely  to  perform  that  office." 
The  Prayer-Book  service,  though  long  disused  and  now 

1  "  The  Grand  Imposter  unmasked,  or  a  detection  of  the  notori- 
ous hypocrisy  and  desperate  impiety  of  the  late  Archbishop  (so 
styled)  of  Canterbury,  cunningly  couched  in  that  written  copy 
which  he  read  on  the  scaffold  at  his  execution,  Jan.  10,  1644, 
alias,  called  by  the  public  his  funeral  sermon.  By  Henry 
Burton." 

2  Cf.  Gal.  State  Papers,  Bom.,  1644-5,  p.  24— 

"  Can  Britain's  patriarchal  peer  expire, 
And  bid  the  world  good-night,  without  a  choir 
Of  saints  to  sing  his  requiem,  and  toll 
A  blessing  bell  unto  bis  dying  soul  % "  etc. 
OU  Q 


226 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


condemned,  was  read  by  a  priest  named  Fletcher.1  Dr. 
Layfield  the  vicar,  Laud's  nephew,  had  been  some  years 
in  prison. 

The  parish  of  All  Hallows  never  ceased  to  cherish 
the  memory  of  the  great  man  who  was  buried  in  its 
noble  church.  Round  the  place  where  his  body  was 
laid  clustered  before  long  the  graves  of  devoted  friends 
and  eminent  Churchmen,  as  though  the  place  where 
the  martyr  slept  were  counted  holy  by  those  who  best 
loved  the  Church.  Eusebius  Andrewes,  George  Snaith 
(his  faithful  friend  and  servant),  John  Kettlewell,  and 
the  vicars  Edward  Layfield  and  John  Gaskarth,  were 
laid  to  rest  near  the  spot  where  the  Archbishop  was 
interred.  Nor  did  the  people  remember  him  less  than 
the  priests  and  scholars :  Laud  became  a  Christian 
name  in  Barking. 

Memorials  soon  began  to  appear.  In  1646  the  House 
of  Commons  were  informed  that  an  almanack  had  been 
put  forth  by  Captain '  George  Wharton,  student  in 
astronomy,  "  wherein  the  Archbishop  is  entered  in  the 
Calendar  for  a  martyr " ; 2  and  Thomas  Vaughan  3  in 
his  poetic  epitaph  exclaimed — 

"  Now  a  new  list  of  martyrs  is  begun." 

Some  years  later,  after  the  King  too  had  mounted 
the  scaffold,  a  beautiful  medal  testified  to  the  popular 
feeling.    On  one  side  is  a  fine  portrait  of  the  Archbishop, 

1  The  entry  in  the  Eegister  is — 

Burialls.    Ano  Do:  1644  and  1645. 
T  I  Died  I  Buried  I  William  Laude  Archbishop  of 

January  |    10   |     n     |   Canterbury  Beheaded  [erasure] 

2  Col.  State  Papers,  Bom.,  1645-7,  pp.  600,  601. 

3  Thomas  Vaughan  (Eugenius  Phiialetkes),  brother  of  Henry 
Vaughan  the  Silurist.  Canon  Wilton  has  published  a  beautiful 
translation  of  the  Epitaphium  Gulielmi  Land. 


TROUBLES,  TRIAL,  AND  DEATH 


227 


probably  one  of  the  best  likenesses  that  exist,  with  the 
inscription  GVIL.  LAVD.  ARCHIEPISC.  CANTVAR. 
X.  JAN.  1644.  The  reverse  shows  a  view  of  London, 
the  Thames  and  Lambeth,  while  above  one  cherub  is 
carrying  up  a  mitre  and  pastoral  staff,  and  is  followed 
by  two  others  bearing  a  crown,  sceptre,  and  orb.  The 
legend  reads  SANCTI  CAROLI  PRAECURSOR.1 

The  Restoration  brought  back  Laud  to  S.  John's, 
where  he  had  wished  to  be  buried,  "  under  the  altar  or 
Communion  table  there."  Juxon  had  been  buried  with 
great  state  in  the  chapel  of  his  old  college  on  July  9, 
1663.  Three  weeks  later  the  leaden  coffin  containing 
the  remains  of  Laud  was  removed  from  All  Hallows,2 

1  This  medal  was  executed  by  John  Roettier,  soon  after  the 
Restoration.  Another  medal  has  the  portrait,  but  with  plain 
reverse. 

2  He  was  not  forgotten  at  All  Hallows.  The  following  poem, 
in  the  Vestry  book  for  1663,  records  the  removal  of  his  body  and 
eulogizes  his  fame. 

Upon  the  Remoue  of  y!  most  Revend  William 
Lord  Arch-Bishop  of  Canterburie  his  bodie  from 
Allhallowes  Barking  London,  to  S1  John's  Colledg  in 
Oxford,  July  y°  21*  1663. 

When  first  Injustice  Pack't  up  his  High-Court, 

When  Vsurpation  grau'd  a  Broad  Seale  for't, 

When  Death,  in  Butchers  :  dres  did  th'  axe  advance, 

And  Tragique  :  purpose  with  all  Circumstance 

Of  Fright  &  Feare  tooke  up  the  fatall  Stage 

To  act  Rebellion  in  it's  Rule,  and  Rage 

When  Friendship  fainted,  and  late  :  Love  stark  dead, 

When  few  own'd  him,  whom  most  men  honored, 

Then  Barkinge  home,  then  (thus  by  th'  world  forsooke) 

The  butcherd  Bodie  of  ye  Martyre  tooke, 

Tore  up  her  quiett  Marble,  lodg'd  him  sure 

In  ye  cheife  Chamber  of  her  Sepulture  ; 

Where  he  intire,  and  undisturb'd  hath  bin, 

Murther'd  &  mangl'd  tho  at's  laying  in, 

Where  he's  vntainted  too,  free  from  distrust 

Of  a  vile  mixture  with  Rebellious  dust ; 


228 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


and  brought  privately — as  had  been  his  express  direction 
— by  a  number  of  the  Fellows  at  10  o'clock  at  night 
through  the  deserted  streets,  and  in  by  the  gate  of  the 
grove  to  the  chapel.  Then  when  the  Vice-President 
had  spoken  a  solemn  oration  in  the  presence  of  the 
college  and  of  the  Vice-Chancellor,  and  some  heads  of 
houses,  the  coffin1  was  laid  in  a  vault  under  the  altar 
between  the  founder  and  Juxon.  There  it  still  rests ; 
and  the  college  which  he  loved  so  dearly  and  endowed 
so  generously  counts  it  her  highest  honour  to  guard  the 
bones  of  the  greatest  of  her  sons. 

To  make  that  sure,  Braue  Andrew's 2  begg'd  it  meet 
To  Eott  at's  Coffin,  and  to  rise  at's  Feet. 
But  now  our  Learned  Lawd's  to  Oxford  sent, 
St.  John's  is  made  St.  William's  Monument, 
Made  so  bym'self  ;  This  pious  Primate's  knowne 
Best,  by  the  Bookes,  and  Buildings  of  his  owne, 
Whome,  though  th'  accursed  age  did  then  deny 
To  lay  him,  where  ye  Royall  Reliques  lye, 
Which  was  his  due  ;  At's  Bodies  next  Reinoue 
Hee'l  Rise,  and  Reigne  amongst  ye  blest  aboue. 

1  The  coffin  had  on  it  a  small  brass  plate,  with  the  Archbishop's 
arms  and  the  following  inscription :  "In  hac  cistula  con- 
duntur  exuviae  Gulielmi  Laud,  Archiepiscopi  Cantuariensis  ;  qui 
securi  percussus,  immortalitatem  adiit  die  x  Januarii,  aetati  suae, 
LXXII,  Archiepiscopatus  XII."  A  similar  plate  was  affixed  by 
William  Dell,  the  Archbishop's  faithful  secretary,  to  the  south  wall 
of  the  college  chapel,  above  the  sedilia,  and  within  a  few  feet  of 
the  grave,  where  it  still  remains. 

2  Colonel  Eusebius  Andrewes. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


MEMORIALS  AND  CHARACTER. 

Something  has  already  been  said  of  the  devotion 
with  which  Laud  came  to  be  regarded  from  the  moment 
of  his  death.  A  character  which  had  seemed  to  some 
hard  and  unsympathizing,  was  recognized  to  contain 
the  strength  and  the  spiritual  power  in  which  are  found 
the  seed  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  Men  soon  began  to 
cherish  his  memory,  to  preserve  his  relics,  and  to  carry 
out  his  principles. 

The  Church  of  England  as  she  now  stands,  it  has 
been  said,  is  Laud's  truest  memorial.  His  energy, 
and  his  devotion — that  true  spirit  of  the  ecclesiastical 
statesman  who  builds  not  for  the  present  but  for  the 
future — preserved  her  through  the  storms  of  political 
revolution,  and  gave  her  the  unity  and  solidarity  with 
which  she  returned  at  the  Restoration.  But  his  memory 
was  kept  alive  in  the  mind  of  future  generations  by 
many  tangible  memorials.  His  will,  written  in  the 
Tower  a  year  before  his  death,  is  a  simple  but  glowing 
record  of  the  generosity  which  had  been  one  of  the 
brightest  features  of  his  life.    He  was  a  poor  man  :  no 


230  WILLIAM  LAUD 

archbishop  for  centuries,  it  was  said,  had  ever  been  so 
poor.  As  he  had  given  in  his  life,  so  he  bequeathed 
in  death,  with  a  particular  generosity  which  was  the 
evidence  of  a  personal  affection.  To  his  kinsfolk,  the 
grandchildren  of  his  mother,  he  left  each  some  money ; 
to  all  who  had  been  his  chaplains  some  memorial,  a 
ring  or  watch  that  had  been  his  own.  To  each  of  his 
servants  he  left  money,  and  for  many  he  had  already 
provided.  To  the  poor  of  all  the  parishes  with  which 
he  had  been  connected — S.  Mary  Magdalen  and  S. 
Giles  in  Oxford,  Stanford,  North  Kilworth,  Ibstoke, 
Cuckston,  Norton,  West  Tilbury,  Crick,  Huntingdon, 
Lincoln,  Carmarthen,  Abergwili,  Brecon,  Wells,  Ful- 
ham,  Canterbury,  Croydon,  and  Lambeth — he  left  bene- 
factions. The  University  of  Oxford  he  had  endowed 
with  an  Arabic  Readership,  and  his  munificent  gift  of 
MSS.  had  enriched  the  Bodleian.  Reading,  his  birth- 
place, had  been  especially  favoured.  He  bequeathed  to 
it  property,  besides  the  money  he  had  already  given — 
endowments  for  ministers,  for  scholars,  apprentices,  and 
maidens  deserving  of  a  marriage-portion.  Most  of 
these  are  enjoyed,  not  always  without  contest,  to  the 
present  day.1  His  benefactions  to  other  places  in 
Berkshire  were  also  large.2  His  personal  friends,  the 
Duchess  of  Buckingham,  widow  of  his  dear  friend 
whom  he  had  never  forgotten,  her  son  and  daughter, 

1  See  Statement  of  the  Municipal  Charities,  Reading,  1890 ; 
and  a  Criticism  of  the  Rev.  C.  R.  Honey  (declaring  that  no 
restriction  to  Church  folk  was  intended  by  Laud).  Particulars 
of  the  early  use  of  the  benefactions  will  be  found  in  Hist.  MSS. 
Comm.,  Report  XI.,  App.,  pt.  7,  pp.  197, 198,  205,  etc.  It  appears 
that  some  of  the  early  applicants  for  the  charity  claimed  to  be  of 
kin  to  the  Archbishop. 

2  These  have  been  chronicled  by  Mr.  John  Bruce  for  the 
Berkshire  Ashmolean  Society,  1841. 


MEMORIALS  AND  CHARACTER 


231 


and  his  "  much-honoured  friend,  William  Lord,  Marquis 
of  Newcastle,"  received  tokens  of  his  remembrance. 
And  there  was  a  bequest  more  touching  still.  "  Item  : 
I  take  the  boldness  to  give  to  my  dear  and  dread 
Sovereign,  King  Charles  (whom  God  bless),  £1000, 
and  I  do  forgive  him  the  debt  which  he  owes  me, 
being  £2000,  and  require  that  the  two  tallies  for  it  be 
given  up." 

To  S.  Paul's  he  left  £800;  to  his  own  college  all 
his  chapel  plate  and  furniture,  all  the  books  in  his 
study  at  the  time  of  his  death,  and  £500  to  buy  land. 
"  Something  else  I  have  done  for  them  already,  accord- 
ing to  my  ability ;  and  God's  everlasting  blessing  be 
upon  that  place  and  that  society  for  ever."  "  Some- 
thing else "  he  had  indeed  done,  "  according  to  his 
ability."  When  the  college,  at  her  founder's  prayers, 
yearly  reads  the  commemoration  of  "  rich  men  fur- 
nished with  ability,"  she  cannot  choose  but  think  of  the 
most  generous  of  them  whom  in  all  her  past  history  she 
has  known. 

The  college  which  he  loved  is  indeed  his  abiding 
memorial.  The  beautiful  and  unique  building  which 
he  added  to  the  glories  of  Oxford  architecture  stands 
yet,  with  its  dark  panelled  rooms  and  its  bright  com- 
fortable library,  as  the  witness  of  his  munificence  and 
his  taste.  Pictures  of  him,  one  at  least,  it  may  be, 
from  Vandyke's  own  hand,  and  busts  by  Hubert  le 
Sueur,  who  made  for  him  the  royal  statues  which 
stand  still  in  their  sculptured  niches  where  his  loyalty 
placed  them,  recall  to  those  who  yet  read  his  books 
and  enjoy  his  benefactions  what  manner  of  man  he  was. 
There  are  other  still  dearer  relics.  A  pastoral  staff, 
found  in  the  college  after  the  Restoration,  may  or  may 


232 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


not  have  been  his.  The  gorgeous  vestments  which 
the  founder  gave  to  the  chapel  may  never  have  been 
worn  by  Laud,  though  they  were  almost  certainly  used 
in  his  time.  But  the  large  skull-cap,  which  fell  from 
his  head  on  the  scaffold,  and  the  staff  on  which  he 
leant  as  he  walked  to  execution,  were  undoubtedly 
his  own.1 

And  most  precious  of  all  are  the  two  books  in  which 
his  clear  bold  hand  traced  the  record  of  his  life  and 
of  his  troubles.  The  Diary  is  a  small  octavo  volume, 
written  in  very  neat  penmanship,  in  lines  small  and  close 
together.  There  are  many  erasures  and  insertions,  as 
in  a  book  which  was  much  used  and  intended  for  no 
eye  but  the  writer's.  A  large  part  of  the  year  1640  is 
burnt  out :  this  was  done  when  the  book  was  in  Prynne's 
hands,  whether  by  carelessness  or  malice  it  is  impossible 
to  say.  Upon  the  old  cover  of  the  book  were  written 
by  Archbishop  Sancroft  the  following  words — "Arch- 
bishop Laud's  original  Diary.  Great  care  to  be  taken 
of  it."    The  History  of  his  Troubles  and  Trial  is  a  larger 

1  The  following  inscription  is  plaeed  on  the  case  containing 
the  ebony  and  ivory  walking-stick — 

Hoc  bacnlo  dextrans  subeunte 
Gressus  suos  firmavit 
Gulielmus  Laud. 
Archiepiscopus  Cantuar. 
idemque  hujus  collegii  Benefactor 
insignis,  cum  ad  mortem 
immeritam  ductus  esset. 
Praesidenti  et  sociis 
Coll.  Divi  Johannis  Baptistae 
d.  d. 

Gul.  Aubrey  Phelp,  A.M. 
Ecclesiae  de  Stanwell 
in  Com.  Middlesex  Vicarius. 
A.D.  MDCCCXV. 


MEMORIALS  AND  CHARACTER 


233 


volume,  written  on  one  side  of  the  page,  with  occasional 
additions  and  corrections  opposite.  It  was  first  placed 
in  the  college  most  probably  by  Dr.  Baylie,  his  executor, 
and  was,  with  the  Diary,  for  a  time  in  the  hands  of 
Archbishops  Sheldon  and  Sancroft.  Both  were  pub- 
lished by  Henry  Wharton  in  1694. 

From  these  two  volumes  it  may  be  said  that  the 
great  Tory  and  Church  movement  which  was  so  striking 
a  feature  of  the  age  of  Anne  received  no  inconsiderable 
part  of  its  strength.  The  great  figure  round  whom  the 
later  Caroline  divines,  the  eminent  writers  of  the  reign 
of  Charles  II.  and  the  learned  and  chivalrous  non-jurors, 
clustered,  was  undoubtedly  William  Laud,  in  whom 
the  Church  principles  which  they  held  dear  seemed  to 
be  personified  and  hallowed.  The  publication  of  Laud's 
Works,  and  particularly  his  Devotions,  exercised  on 
Church  feeling  a  parallel  influence  to  that  exercised  on 
politics  by  the  immortal  history  of  Clarendon. 

An  ojjhium  quoti&immm,  being  the  earlier  part  of 

his  Devotions,  was  issued  in  1660  and  in  1663.  In 

1667,  1683,  1688,  1705,  other  and  enlarged  editions 

appeared.    The  Diary  and  the  History  were  published 

in  1695  by  Henry  Wharton.1    The  public  mind  had 

been  prepared  both  by  the  general  loyal  reaction  and 

by  the  great  influence  of  the  Devotions  to  regard  the 

Archbishop  as  a  great  and  sincere  champion  of  the 

Faith.    But  the  Diary  and  the  History  for  the  first 

time  revealed  fully  to  the  world  what  manner  of  man 

was  he  who  had  so  profoundly  affected  the  history  of 

the  Church.    Sheldon  and  Sancroft  were  both  eager 

1  Prynne's  garbled  version  of  the  Diary  gives  no  true  idea  of 
its  contents.  Laud  himself  regarded  the  History  as  his  vindication, 
and  especially  desired  that  it  should  be  translated  into  Latin,  to 
explain  his  position  to  foreign  nations. 


234 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


to  vindicate  his  memory  by  issuing  these  genuine 
memorials  of  his  life,  but  it  was  reserved  for  Henry 
Wharton  to  carry  out  their  intention.  His  aim  in  the 
matter  is  quite  clear.  He  was  enthusiastic  for  the 
memory  of  the  great  English  Churchman.  "  I  regard 
it,"  he  wrote  in  the  preface  to  the  edition  of  1695,  "  the 
most  fortunate  transaction  of  my  whole  life  to  have 
contributed  herein  to  the  vindication  of  the  memory 
and  the  cause  of  that  most  excellent  prelate  and  blessed 
martyr,  to  whom  I  have  always  paid  a  more  especial 
veneration,  ever  since  I  was  able  to  form  any  judgment 
in  these  matters,  as  firmly  believing  him  to  have  taken 
up  and  prosecuted  the  best  and  most  effectual  method, 
(although  then  in  great  measure  unsuccessful,  through 
the  malignity  of  the  times),  and  to  have  had  the  noblest, 
the  most  zealous,  and  most  sincere  intentions  therein, 
towards  re-establishing  the  beauty,  the  honour,  and  the 
force  of  religion  in  that  part  of  the  Catholic  Church  (the 
Church  of  England)  to  the  service  of  which  I  have 
entirely  devoted  my  life,  my  labours,  and  my  fortunes." 
To  Wharton  Laud  was  the  martyr  of  the  Catholic 
faith  in  the  English  Church.  The  Church,  however, 
which  deemed  Charles  a  martyr  did  not  bestow  the 
same  honour  upon  the  Archbishop.  In  a  sense  indeed 
it  may  be  said  that  Laud  did  not  deserve  the  title  as 
did  the  King.  He  died  unquestionably  in  consequence 
of  his  bold  profession  of  opinions  for  which  he  would 
gladly  have  given  his  life,  but  he  had  no  choice  to 
change  those  opinions,  or  to  save  his  life  by  abandoning 
his  principles.  But  he  had  taught  Charles  to  suffer  for 
the  truth :  he  had  instilled  into  him,  there  can  be  no 
question,  that  one  last  consistent  faith,  the  belief  in 
the  paramount  claim  on  his  allegiance  of  the  English 


MEMORIALS  AND  CHARACTER 


235 


Church  in  its  spiritual  completeness,  which,  amid  all 
his  changes  and  in  all  his  desperate  shifts,  he  never 
abandoned.  The  one  firm  point  in  Charles's  mind  was 
his  devotion  to  the  essential  system  of  the  Church — its 
threefold  ministry  and  its  Catholic  faith.  Everything 
but  this  he  would  sacrifice  :  he  would  consent  that  the 
bishops  should  be  controlled  by  synods  or  by  presbyters, 
he  would  agree  to  the  establishment  of  Presbyterianism 
for  five  years,  but  he  would  never  abandon  the  founda- 
tions upon  which  the  historic  Church  was  laid. 

To  the  superficial  or  unobservant  there  might  seem  a 
very  small,  difference  between  a  moderated  episcopacy 
responsible  to  assemblies  and  the  direct  government  of 
the  assemblies  themselves,  between  a  state-established 
Presbyterianism  and  a  suppression  of  the  episcopal 
order  and  the  threefold  ministry ;  but  Charles  had 
learnt  that  in  the  difference,  small  though  it  seemed, 
lay  the  core  of  the  whole  matter.  Should  the  English 
Church  divide  itself  from  the  historic  Christianity  with 
which  its  Reformation  in  all  its  iconoclastic  vehemence 
had  so  carefully  preserved  the  essential  links  ?  Laud 
had  confirmed  the  clergy  in  the  answer  which  had 
been  made  by  the  fathers  of  the  Church  under 
Henry  VIII.  and  Elizabeth.  Charles  had  learnt  from 
him  to  cling  desperately  to  the  essential  fabric  of  the 
Church.  "  I  assure  you,"  he  wrote  at  a  time  of  the 
deepest  stress,  "  the  change  would  be  no  less  and  worse 
than  if  Popery  were  brought  in,  for  we  should  have 
neither  lawful  priests,  nor  sacraments  duly  administered, 
nor  God  publicly  served,  but  according  to  the  foolish 
fancy  of  every  idle  parson."  1  The  words,  written  a 
year  after  the  Archbishop's  execution,  have  a  curious 
1  See  Gardiner's  History  of  Civil  War,  vol.  iii.  p.  135. 


236 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


Laudian  ring  about  them.  The  King's  confessor  had 
not  lived  and  died  in  vain.  He  had  taught  Charles 
that  if  everything  else  was  made  matter  of  barter,  was 
used  to  snatch  a  temporary  advantage,  in  negotiation 
or  intrigue,  never  for  the  Crown's  necessities  must 
the  historic  Church  itself  be  abandoned  or  put  in 
pawn. 

As  Charles  in  his  controversy  with  Henderson  1 
showed  this  one  last  firmness  of  his  vacillating  mind, 
so  when  the  last  struggle  came  he  still  refused  to  save 
his  life,  as  there  can  be  little  doubt  he  could  have  done, 
by  surrendering  and  deserting  the  Church  of  his 
fathers.  In  this  sense  it  is  that  Charles  was,  and  that 
Laud  made  him,  a  martyr.  This  is  the  real  meaning  of 
the  long  contest.  In  this  sense  Dr.  Mozley's  statement 
is  fully  justified — "  Laud  saved  the  English  Church." 

Beside  interest  of  such  historic  importance  as  this 
the  petty  criticisms  of  controversialists,  or  of  narrowly 
prejudiced  writers  such  as  Macaulay  or  Hallam,  sink 
into  insignificance.  Argument  as  to  the  right  or  wrong 
of  the  details  of  Laud's  action  is  irrelevant  till  the 
issues  before  him  and  the  principles  upon  which  he 
acted  are  intelligently  appreciated.  Laud  claimed  to 
be  the  devoted  son  of  the  historic  Church  in  England. 
"  I  die  as  I  have  lived," — it  is  the  solemn  profession  of 
faith  in  his  last  testament, — "  in  the  true  orthodox  pro- 
fession of  the  Catholic  faith  of  Christ,  foreshadowed  by 
the  prophets  and  preached  to  the  world  by  Christ 
Himself,  His  blessed  Apostles  and  their  successors; 
and  a  true  member  of  His  Catholic  Church,  within  the 
communion  of  a  living  part  thereof,  the  present  Church 
of  England,  as  it  stands  established  by  law."  That 
1  See  Von  Ranke,  History  of  England,  vol.  ii.  p.  466. 


MEMORIALS  AND  CHARACTER 


237 


was  his  claim  and  his  firm  belief.  It  would  take  a 
theological  treatise  to  examine  his  opinions  in  relation 
to  every  article  of  the  Christian  creed ;  but  on  two  at 
least,  which  are  central  points  of  historic  criticism  and 
controversy,  it  is  clear  that  he  trod  in  the  footsteps  of 
the  primitive  and  historic  Church. 

In  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist,  as  his  Jesuit  critic  1 
states,  he  admits  neither  the  transubstantiation  of 
Roman  theologians  nor  the  consubstantiation  of  Luther. 
He  has  no  need  to  resort  to  such  modern  definitions. 
He  will  not  pass  beyond  the  reverent  reticence  of  the 
early  Church.  "In  the  Most  Blessed  Sacrament,"  he 
says  to  Fisher,  "the  worthy  receiver  is  by  his  faith 
made  spiritually  partaker  of  the  true  and  real  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ  truly  and  really,  and  of  all  the 
benefits  of  His  Passion."  But  he  does  not  restrict  the 
Presence,  though  he  does  limit  the  benefits,  to  the 
worthy  communicant.  The  corporal  (in  the  sense  of 
carnal)  Presence  he  does  again  and  again  deny ;  but  he 
is  far  from  denying  the  objective  Reality.  He  quotes 
with  approbation  the  statement  of  Ridley,  that  he  and 
his  opponents  were  agreed — and  it  would  be  well,  he 
says,  if  some  Protestants  did  not  "  except  against  it " 
— "  that2  in  the  Sacrament  is  the  very  true  and  natural 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ,  even  that  which  was  born 
of  the  Virgin  Mary,  which  ascended  into  Heaven, 
which  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God  the  Father, 
which  shall  come  again  to  judge  the  quick  and  the 
dead ;  only  we  differ  in  modo,  in  the  way  and  manner 
of  being ;  we  confess  all  one  Thing  to  be  in  the  Sacra- 
ment, and  dissent  in  the  manner  of  being  there."  The 

1  Laud's  Labyrinth,  p.  308. 
'l  Works,  ii.  330. 


238 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


dispute  to  him  was  simply  between  the  rigid  Roman 
definition  and  the  reverent  Catholic  faith.  "  The  altar 
is  the  place  of  God's  Presence,  and  the  Sacrament 
commemorates  and  represents  (i.  e.  presents  again  in 
memorial)  the  great  sacrifice  offered  up  by  Christ 
Himself."  1  Laud's  language  on  the  Eucharist,  to  say 
the  very  least,  is  undeniably  patient  of  a  fully  Catholic 
interpretation. 

The  same  is  true  of  the  "  doctrine  of  intention."  He 
recognized,  as  do  so  many  modern  theologians  of  the 
Roman  obedience,  the  difficulty  of  any  definition  which 
should  require  a  definitely  Catholic  belief  on  each  occa- 
sion of  the  celebration  of  a  sacrament.2  Still  more  clear 
is  his  assertion  of  apostolic  succession  and  the  essential 
necessity  of  Episcopacy.  The  Church  government  by 
bishops  is  not  alterable  by  human  law.  "  Bishops  may 
be  regulated  and  limited  by  human  laws  in  those  things 
which  are  but  incidents  to  their  calling ;  but  their 
calling,  as  far  as  it  is  jure  divino,  by  Divine  right,  cannot 
be  taken  away."3  He  accepts  the  statements  of  Hall 
and  Bilson,  and  appeals  to  the  historical  statement 
of  the  English  Ordinal.  Laud  certainly  held  no  less 
strong  an  opinion  than  Parker.  "  Up  to  the  period  of 
the  Reformation  there  was  no  other  idea  of  Episcopacy 
except  that  of  transmission  of  Apostolic  commission  : 
that  the  ministry  of  Episcopal  government  could  be 
introduced  without  such  a  link  was  never  contemplated 
until  Bubenhagen  reconstituted  a  nominal  Episcopate 
in  Denmark,  and  this  was  an  example  not  likely  to  be 

1  See  Works,  ii.  340. 

2  Cf.  the  Abbe  Duchesne  in  the  Bulletin  Critique  of  July  15, 
1894  :  "N'oublions  pasqu'une  partie  du  clerge'  francais  derive  son 
ordination  de  M.  de  Talleyrand." 

3  Works,  iv.  309—311. 


MEMORIALS  AND  CHARACTER 


239 


taken  in  England;  nor  was  it  so  accepted."1  It  is 
perfectly  clear  that  it  was  not  accepted  by  Laud. 

Laud  never  consciously  departed  from  the  standards 
of  the  English,  or  of  the  Universal,  Church.  In  this 
lay  the  value  of  the  service  which  he  rendered  to  Eng- 
land. At  a  time  when  political  difficulties  and  religious 
enthusiasms  were  tending  more  than  ever  to  accen- 
tuate the  differences  between  the  great  body  of  the 
Latin  Church  and  the  foreign  reformed  sects,  Laud's 
determination  and  force  asserted,  with  a  clearness  which 
it  was  impossible  to  mistake,  the  claim  of  the  English 
Church  to  be  part  of  the  continuous  historic  fold,  joined 
still,  in  spite  of  division,  by  the  one  Catholic  faith.  How 
far  the  claim  was  justified  may  be  a  point  for  theolo- 
gians to  dispute  upon :  it  is  impossible  to  deny  that 
it  was  made  and  repeated  by  Laud  with  a  power  which 
impressed  it  upon  succeeding  generations.  When  the 
Church  came  back  at  the  Restoration,  it  came  back 
with  no  thought  of  withdrawing  one  jot  of  its  Catholic 
claim.  Juxon,  Laud's  nearest  friend  among  ecclesiastics, 
and  Sheldon,  who  was  almost  his  pupil,  acted  entirely 
upon  the  principles  for  which  Laud  had  been  insistent. 
There  was  no  question  now,  as  there  had  been  before 
1645,  of  the  possibility  of  a  great  Anglican  schism. 
The  Church  adhered  firmly  to  the  Catholic  creeds  and 
the  Apostolic  ministry. 

Carlyle  said  that  Laud  was  "  an  ill-starred  pedant," 
and  "  like  a  college  tutor  whose  whole  world  is  forms, 
college  rules."  There  is  this  truth  in  the  statement — 
that  he  had  learnt  by  his  Oxford  training  at  least  the 
way  to  teach  men.    His  methods,  rough  or  formal 

1  See  the  weighty  words  of  the  Bishop  of  Oxford  in  his  Second 
Charge,  1893,  pp.  48  sqq. 


240 


WILLIAM  LAUD 


though  they  might  seem,  were  the  methods  of  a  man 
who  has  studied  the  art  of  education.  They  might  be 
disliked,  they  might  appear  even  to  fail,  but  in  the  end 
they  were  successful,  and  their  result  proved  indelible. 
Laud  was,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  the  school-master 
of  the  English  Church.  She  has  not  yet  outgrown  his 
teaching,  nor  is  it  probable  that  she  ever  will. 

There  were  some  noble  words  said  by  the  Puritan 
Stephen  Marshall  at  the  funeral  of  Pym  :  "  I  beseech 
you  let  not  any  of  you  have  one  sad  thought  touching 
him ;  nor  would  I  have  you  mourn  out  of  any  such 
apprehension  as  the  enemies  have,  and  for  which  they 
rejoice,  as  if  our  cause  were  not  good,  or  we  should  lose 
it  for  want  of  hands  to  carry  it  on.  No,  beloved,  this 
cause  must  prosper;  and  although  we  were  all  dead, 
our  armies  overthrown,  and  even  our  Parliament  dis- 
solved, this  cause  must  prevail."  These  fine  words  are 
true  of  Pym's  best  work,  but  in  matters  of  religion  how 
much  more  truly  may  they  be  used  of  Laud !  The 
more  Englishmen  study  the  history  of  the  critical  age 
in  which  he  lived,  the  more  they  will  reverence  the 
memory  of  the  man  who  preserved  to  the  Church  of 
England  both  her  Catholicity  and  her  freedom. 


THE  END. 


Richard  Clay  £■  Sons,  Limited,  London  &  Bungay, 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Libraries 


1   1012  01237  9659 


Date  Due 


